CHILDREN AS CHANGE AGENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY: An Action Research Case Study in a Kindergarten Sharon Marie Stuhmcke M. Ed (EC) (QUT) B. Tec (EC) (QUT) ADCC (BCAE) Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Education 2012 Principal Supervisor Associate Professor Julie Davis Associate Supervisor Associate Professor Lisa Ehrich
242
Embed
CHILDREN AS CHANGE AGENTS FOR - QUT ePrints · PDF fileAn Action Research Case Study in a Kindergarten Sharon ... constructivist approaches focus on the co-construction ... Children
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
CHILDREN AS CHANGE AGENTS FOR
SUSTAINABILITY:
An Action Research Case Study in a Kindergarten
Sharon Marie Stuhmcke
M. Ed (EC) (QUT) B. Tec (EC) (QUT)
ADCC (BCAE)
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
Queensland University of Technology
Faculty of Education
2012
Principal Supervisor Associate Professor Julie Davis
Associate Supervisor Associate Professor Lisa Ehrich
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability iii Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
KEY WORDS
transformative education; early childhood education; environmental education;
education for sustainability; co-constructivism; critical theory; action research case
study; young children; kindergarten; project approach.
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability v Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
ABSTRACT
At a time when global consumption and production levels are 25 percent higher
than the Earth’s sustainable carrying capacity, there are worldwide calls to find ways
to sustain the Earth for this and future generations. A central premise of this study is
that education systems have an obligation to participate in this move towards
sustainability and can respond by embedding education for sustainability into
curricula. This study took early childhood education as its focus due to the teacher-
researcher’s own concerns about the state of the planet, coupled with early childhood
education’s established traditions of nature-based and child-centred pedagogy.
The study explored the experiences of a class of kindergarten children as they
undertook a Project Approach to learning about environmental sustainability. The
Project Approach is an adaptation of Chard’s work which is situated within a
constructivist theoretical framework (Chard, 2011). The Project Approach involves
in-depth investigations around an identified topic of interest. It has three phases:
introductory, synthesising and culminating phase. The study also investigated the
learning journey of the classroom teacher/researcher who broadened her long-held
co-constructivist teaching approaches to include transformative practices in order to
facilitate curriculum which embedded education for sustainability. While co-
constructivist approaches focus on the co-construction of knowledge, transformative
practices are concerned with creating change.
An action research case study was conducted. This involved twenty-two children
who attended an Australian kindergarten. Data were collected and analysed over a
seven week period. The study found that young children can be change agents for
sustainability when a Project Approach is broadened to include transformative
practices. The study also found that the child participants were able to think
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability vi Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
critically about environmental and sustainability issues, were able to create change in
their local contexts, and took on the role of educators to influence others’
environmental behaviours. Another finding was that the teacher-researcher’s
participation in the study caused a transformation of both her teaching philosophy
and the culture at the kindergarten. An important outcome of the study was the
development of a new curriculum model that integrates and has applicability for
curriculum development and teacher practice.
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability vii Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
KEY WORDS ......................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................xii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................xiv CHAPTER ONE........................................................................................................1
The Research Interest .............................................................................................1 Early Childhood Education ................................................................................5 Early Childhood Education for Sustainability.....................................................8
Central Research Questions..................................................................................11 Significance of the Study .....................................................................................12 The Researcher ....................................................................................................13 Action Research...................................................................................................14
Data Collection ................................................................................................15 Research Ethics................................................................................................16
This Study’s Contribution to Scholarship and Professional Practice .....................17 Chapter Summary ................................................................................................18
The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education ..............................20 The Sustainability Challenge................................................................................20
Economic sustainability............................................................................22 Social sustainability..................................................................................22 Political sustainability..............................................................................22 Environmental sustainability ....................................................................22
Responses to the Sustainability Challenge ........................................................23 Education’s Role in the Sustainability Challenge..................................................26 History of Environmental Education and Education for Sustainability..................30
Critical Theory and Environmental Education ..................................................32 Creating Change...........................................................................................34 Empowerment and Agency...........................................................................34 Critical Thinking ..........................................................................................35 Taking action ...............................................................................................36
Teaching approaches for education for sustainability................................36 Early Childhood Education ..................................................................................38
The Kindergarten’s Early Childhood Curriculum .............................................40 Co-constructivist Theory and Early Childhood Education.............................42 The Project Approach...................................................................................45 Documentation .............................................................................................47
Education for Sustainability and Early Childhood Education: Synthesising the Fields ...................................................................................................................49 Emerging Theoretical Underpinnings for Early Childhood Education for Sustainability .......................................................................................................54 Emerging Characteristics of Early Childhood Education for Sustainability...........59
The Project Approach in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability ............60 Conceptual Framework for this Study ..................................................................61
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability viii Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Problem-solving .............................................................................................. 65 Democratic Practice ........................................................................................ 66
The Conceptual Framework as a Theoretical Basis for the Study ................. 67 Chapter Summary................................................................................................ 68
Methodology....................................................................................................... 70 Qualitative Research ........................................................................................... 70 Case Study .......................................................................................................... 71
The Kindergarten............................................................................................. 72 Action Research .................................................................................................. 75
Teacher Research ............................................................................................ 76 Teachers and Action Research......................................................................... 77 Research Participants....................................................................................... 80 Nested Research .............................................................................................. 81
The Action Research Study ................................................................................. 82 The Project Approach phases .................................................................. 85 The children’s roles ................................................................................. 87 The teacher’s roles .................................................................................. 87 The collaborative roles ............................................................................ 87
Data Collection and Analysis .............................................................................. 89 Participant observation ........................................................................... 90 Teacher reflections .................................................................................. 91 Photographs and PowerPoints................................................................. 91 Conversation transcripts and community of practice................................ 92 Curriculum plans, kindergarten newsletters, letters to parents and
Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 94 Research Ethics ................................................................................................... 96 Qualitative Research Validity.............................................................................. 98 Research Limitations......................................................................................... 102 Chapter Summary.............................................................................................. 105
Findings and Discussion.................................................................................... 106 The Study’s Action Research Cycle................................................................... 106
Steps 1 and 2. Reflection and Raising Questions............................................ 107 Step 3. Planning to Seek Answers.................................................................. 112 Steps 4 and 5. Data Collection and Analysis for the Children’s Environment Project ........................................................................................................... 112
Introductory Phase (first two weeks).......................................................... 116 Playground plans (week one) ................................................................. 116 The rainforest collage (week one) .......................................................... 119 The nature hunt (week one).................................................................... 120 Beginning the class environment model (week two)................................ 121 Teacher reflection (at the end of the introductory phase) ....................... 123
Synthesising phase (three weeks)............................................................... 125 Recycling and nature conservation (weeks three and four)..................... 125
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability ix Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
The rainforest puppet show (week five, 14/9/2010) .................................131 The environment model (continued)........................................................133 Teacher reflection (end of the synthesising phase) ..................................135
Culminating Phase (final two weeks)..........................................................137 Poster documentation .............................................................................137 The class book ........................................................................................138 The environment model (continued)........................................................139 Teacher reflection (end of the culminating phase)...................................140
Continuing Influence of the Children’s Environment Project ......................142 Children’s ongoing references to project learning ..................................142 The project’s influence on the red group.................................................142 Children’s end of year production ..........................................................143
Step 6: Meta Analysis of the Study and Identification of Themes ...............144 Young children can think critically about environmental sustainability
issues......................................................................................................144 Young children are able to create change in their local contexts.............145 Young children are able to take on the role of educators.........................145
Implications for teacher practice.................................................................146 Addressing Two Research Questions..........................................................149
Thinking of New Actions: The Study’s Implications ......................................155 Chapter Summary ..............................................................................................157
CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................158
Concluding the Study.........................................................................................158 Summary of Previous Chapters ..........................................................................158 Research Question 3. The Teacher-Researcher’s Journey...................................159
Transforming My Teaching Philosophy and Practices ....................................159 Transforming Kindergarten Culture................................................................164
Transformative Project Approach in Early Childhood Education Contexts .....171 Children as Change Agents ............................................................................173
Practical Advancement: Teacher Roles in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability .....................................................................................................174 Recommendations of the Study..........................................................................174
Education for Sustainability in Early Childhood.............................................174 Early Childhood Education should embrace Education for Sustainability .......175
Future Research .................................................................................................177 Implications for Researchers Working with Young Children ..........................178
Appendix A Guidelines for consulting with young children ...............................209 Appendix B Building Waterfalls: Shared Understandings...................................212 Appendix C Early Childhood Australia’s code of ethics related to research........213 Appendix D Teacher-researcher’s conference participation ................................214 Appendix E Roger Hart’s ladder of young people’s participation .......................215 Appendix F Teacher-researcher’s ethics statement .............................................216
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability x Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix G Letter of permission and consent for parents and children.............. 218 Appendix H Kindergarten handbook excerpt ..................................................... 220 Appendix I August newsletter and letter to families .......................................... 221 Appendix J Poster documentation of the children’s environment project ........... 223 Appendix K Class book publication................................................................... 227
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability xi Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Four dimensions of sustainable development (UNESCO, 2005)..………21 Figure 2. Evolution of EE approaches in policy ..…………………………………30 Figure 3. Early environmental education and contemporary EfS.…………………31 Figure 4. Objectivist, co-constructivist and critical views of learning .……………56 Figure 5. Conceptual framework .…………………………………………………62 Figure 6. Diagram representing the research project's nested approach...…………77 Figure 7. The study’s action research cycle .………………………………………83 Figure 8. The children's environment project ..……………………………………81 Figure 9. Quantitative and qualitative criteria for assessing research quality...……99 Figure 7. The study’s action research cycle .........................................................107 Figure 10. Class groups, staffing and attendance patterns for the kindergarten ......108 Figure 11. Sustainable practices at the kindergarten prior to the study ...…………104 Figure 12. Photos of the kindergarten’s physical environment ...............................109 Figure 13. Weekly overview of the fieldwork........................................................114 Figure 14. Photos of children’s artwork about the kindergarten playground...........117 Figure 15. Photo of child’s rainforest collage. .......................................................119 Figure 16. Photo of the initial stage of construction of the ‘environment model’ ...123 Figure 17. Photograph of children designing ‘water cleaning devices’ ..................127 Figure 18. Slide from daily PowerPoint – The Earth game children’s comments ...127 Figure 19. Photograph of a child using a small cup in the sandpit..........................130 Figure 20. Photograph of black satin bower bird puppet........................................131 Figure 21. Photograph of child’s design of a rubbish crane....................................132 Figure 22. Photographs of children’s drawings after rainforest puppet show..........133 Figure 23. Photograph of burrow hidden by trees. .................................................134 Figure 24. Photograph of the environment model with threaded canopy................140 Figure 5. Conceptual framework .........................................................................146 Figure 25. New model: ‘A transformative project approach’ .................................147 Figure 26. Environmentally sustainable practices before and after the study..........166 Figure 27. The influence of the kindergarten’s culture of change...........................167 Figure 5. Conceptual framework .........................................................................170 Figure 25. The transformative project approach ....................................................172
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability xii Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACARA Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority
C&K Creche and Kindergarten Association
DAP Developmentally Appropriate Practice
DEH Department of Environment and Heritage
DETA Department of Education, Training and the Arts
ECEfS Early childhood education for sustainability
ECE Early childhood education
EEC C&K early education consultant
EYLF Belonging, Being & Becoming. Early Years Learning Framework
EfS Education for Sustainability
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
RQ1 Research Question 1
RQ2 Research Question 2
RQ3 Research Question 3
UN United Nations
UNEP United Nations Environment Program
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Children as Change Agents for Sustainability xiii Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet
requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the
best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously
published or written by another person except where due reference is made.
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 21 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
In its Initial Assessment of Sustainability Performance and Opportunities
questionnaire, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (nd) defines
sustainability as:
A process of continual improvement driven by efforts to minimise resource consumption and waste generation, improve environmental quality and well-being, and adhere to social imperatives such as equal opportunities, recognition and respect of gender issues, abolition of child labour etc. Any actions contributing to this process for example, reduction of energy or paper use or recycling, are referred to as ‘sustainability activities’ (para. 8).
Figure 1. Four Dimensions of Sustainable Development (UNESCO, 2005)
Sustainability can be thought of as ‘thinking about forever’ (UNESCO, 2002).
Thinking about forever encompasses more than environment, conservation and
global warming. As demonstrated by Figure 1, it involves working towards a world
that is ecologically, socially, economically and politically sustainable (Fien, 2004;
Earth Charter, 2000). Nature, society, economy and politics play complex and
interdependent roles (Fien, 2004; McMichael 2006a). Thus, quality of life cannot be
sustained or improved while the environment continues to be degraded. The UN’s
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development
(2009) states that “the achievement of sustainable development requires the
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 22 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
integration of its economic, environmental and social components at all levels,
facilitated by continuous dialogue and action in global partnership, focusing on key
sustainable development issues” (para 2). Descriptions of these dimensions
(economic, social, political and environmental sustainability), as depicted in Figure
1, follow.
Economic sustainability refers to the livelihood for people, jobs and income
(UNESCO, 2005). Recent assessments of the ongoing economic crisis increasingly
highlight the deteriorating social and political fallout in the least developed countries
and middle-income countries (UN, 2009). Although there are signs that the worst of
the global financial crisis might be over, there remain significant challenges with
employment, financial services and potential economic defaults by some countries.
Social sustainability concerns human rights issues and people living together in
culturally appropriate ways (UNESCO, 2005). Issues that concern this dimension
include democratic governance, poverty reduction, crisis prevention and recovery,
environment, energy and HIV/AIDS in an effort to improve global sustainability
(UNDP, 2012). Fien (2004) describes social sustainability in terms of “systems
which provide ways for people to live together peacefully, equitably and with respect
for human rights and dignity” (p.185).
Political sustainability places a vital role on political systems. Its goal is for
power to be exercised fairly and democratically through political systems (Fien,
2004; UNESCO, 2005). Politically sustainable systems would base social and
economic decisions upon environmental impacts (Fien, 2004; UNESCO, 2005).
Political sustainability is concerned with politics, policies and decision-making.
Environmental sustainability recognises the imperative of healthy natural
environments for supporting all life systems both human and non-human, including
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 23 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
air, soil, water and food (UNESCO, 2005). It is concerned with the conservation of
natural systems to ensure that all life forms are utilised and protected in ways that do
not compromise quality of life for future generations (Fien, 2004). Such a balance is
yet to be achieved. McMichael (2006b) describes this as a threat that is poorly
recognised and that human understanding of the issues are basic at best and limited
in scope. To put it frankly, current human living patterns cannot be sustained
(Australian Government, 2009). In order to ensure sustainability, UNESCO (2002)
states that humankind must learn how to anticipate the consequences of their actions,
envision a sustainable future and create the steps needed to achieve this vision.
Responses to the Sustainability Challenge
Rather than there being positive international responses and actions around
sustainability, humanity’s most recent past indicates that problems caused by
unsustainable patterns of living are increasing. UNEP’s (2011) Keeping track of our
changing environment publication reports that limited progress on environmental
issues has been achieved. This publication further reports that: carbon emissions
continue to rise; the global mean temperature has increased by 0.4 degrees celsius
between 1992 and 2010; oceans are warming and becoming more acidic; the sea
level continues to rise; forest areas have decreased by 300 million hectares since
1990; renewable energy currently accounts for only 13% of global energy supply;
biodiversity in the tropics has declined by 30%; human losses and economic damage
from natural disasters show an upward trend, and the number of natural disasters is
increasing. In summary, the UNEP (2011) states that:
Maintaining a healthy environment remains one of the greatest global challenges. Without concerted and rapid collective action to curb and decouple resource depletion and the generation of pollution from economic growth, human activities may destroy the very environment that supports economies and sustains life (p. iv).
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 24 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Concerns about the state of the planet have been acknowledged through recent
agreements and reports for which international cooperation has been sought. One
such agreement was the Kyoto Protocol ratified by then Australian Prime Minister,
Kevin Rudd, in December, 2007. A further report released in Australia, The
Garnaut Climate Change Review (2008), again identified the significant
consequences of unsustainability and urged timely attention. Similarly, the Stern
Report (2008) in the United Kingdom stressed the importance of quick and strong
international action. More recently the Framework Convention on Climate Change
(United Nations) was held in Copenhagen in December 2009. This international
meeting resulted in the ‘Copenhagen Accord’ which recognises climate change as
one of humankind’s greatest challenges. However, this meeting failed to achieve a
binding international agreement. Common issues raised in these reports and
proposals include climate change and the reduction in basic elements for living such
as food, water, health and environmental quality. Collectively, they call for action to
reduce climate change, increase energy efficiency, use clean power and foster the
development of sustainable living patterns.
Some significant initiatives commenced and some progress was made, for
example the Australian Government’s Clean Energy Future which includes the
introduction of a carbon tax from July 2012 as a direct response to climate change
(Australian Government, 2012); however, the scale of effort is still overshadowed by
the scope of the problem (Centre for Environment & Sustainability, 2009) and the
consequences of continuing the currently inadequate responses to sustainability are
worldwide. Humanity can no longer afford a passive attitude towards the health of
the planet and societies must respond. At a Rio+20 (UN Convention on Sustainable
Development, Rio De Janeiro, 2012) side event UNESCO (2012) reported that:
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 25 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Moving towards sustainable development cannot be achieved by political agreements, financial incentives or technological solutions alone. To safeguard the natural environment and promote greater global equity, we need a fundamental change in the ways we think and act. This can only be achieved if all individuals and societies are equipped and empowered by knowledge, skills and values as well as heightened awareness to drive such change
(para. 1). While world leaders and policy-makers have a pivotal role in helping to address
sustainability issues, it is argued in this study that to achieve sustainable futures
sustainable practices must become an embedded way of life for all citizens beginning
in early childhood. The problems and impacts of unsustainable living will be
greatest for children who grow up to inherit the problems left by previous
generations. Thus, children need to be equipped to face the challenges of the future,
as well as contribute, alongside adults, to current improvements.
Children have the right to a sustainable future. It is argued that sustainability is
about creating a healthy, safe and secure future for every child and that giving
children agency over their own futures is a fundamental human right. Pramling
Samuelsson and Kaga (2008) extrapolate on children’s rights by stating that “every
child has the right to adequate care, learning, development and protection, and a
sustainable society is where everyone’s rights are recognised, respected and
fulfilled” (p.14). Should current patterns of unsustainable living continue, it is
children who have the most to lose (Lowe, 2007; Davis, 2007b) as they are amongst
the most vulnerable and will be around longer to bear the compounding impacts of
current unsustainable ways of living. The education sector can make potentially
significant contributions to sustainability, as discussed in the next section.
Within the Australian context, creating a sustainable future is described by the
Australian Government’s Department of Environment and Heritage (2005b) as:
… an essential response to the current state of the world’s ecosystems. ‘Sustainability’ acknowledges the economic, social and political pressures that
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 26 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
can inhibit or support the capacity of individuals, communities or the nation to properly care for the environment. Sustainability also seeks to promote stewardship of the environment, encouraging everyone to assume the responsibility of being a caretaker or custodian for the environment (p. 4).
Education’s Role in the Sustainability Challenge
Education has a responsibility to teach children to engage positively in their
current and future lives (Johansson, 2009; McMichael, 2006b). The 1977 Tbilisi
Declaration (UNESCO, 1977), which was the product of the world’s first
intergovernmental conference on environmental education, describes environmental
education as having the aim of enabling learner understanding about environmental,
ecomonic, political and ecological interdependence. The Tbilisi Declaration (1977)
advocated for problem and action-oriented approaches, and for making
environmental education lifelong and future-oriented. Education for sustainability
aims to develop skills that enable children to participate in the transition to
sustainability (Fien, 2004). Furthermore, educating children is seen as part of the
solution to environmental problems as children may not only take on sustainable
practices as habits, they may also have intergenerational influence on family and the
wider community (Ballantyne, Connell & Fien, 2006).
Educational systems are increasingly seen as having an obligation to teach about
how human actions impact on the planet, quality of life and health, as well as helping
to promote hope and find positive solutions to counteract this issue. This obligation
is now recognised as a cross-curricular priority in Australia’s national curriculum
(Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2012). It
can be argued that not teaching children about the consequences of unsustainable
human behaviours on the environment is irresponsible (Hydon, 2007; Young, 2007).
Children not only need to know about sustainability, but they also need to be
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 27 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
empowered to act on this knowledge and to bring about positive change for
sustainability.
The values and principles that support sustainability, therefore, should form the
underlying principles of education for sustainability (Curriculum Corporation, 2007).
This is emphasised by UNESCO (2002) in its documentation for the Decade of
Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014). The underpinning values are
of respect: respect for others in the present and for future generations, and respect for
the planet and what it provides. The Decade of Education for Sustainable
Development (DESD) seeks to challenge humans to adopt new behaviours and
practices that will sustain life on the planet, human and non-human. UNESCO states
that:
The goal of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development is to integrate the principles, values, and practices of sustainable development into all aspects of education and learning. This educational effort will encourage changes in behaviour that will create a more sustainable future in terms of environmental integrity, economic viability, and a just society for present and future generations (paras 1 & 2).
While the importance of education to society’s well-being and prosperity is well
recognised (Australian Government, Department of Environment, Water, Heritage &
Arts, 2009), it is argued here that the current thrust of mainstream education is
economic (Sterling, 2001) rather than the recognition that people and nature are
interdependent (Elliott & Davis, 2009; Sterling, 2001). In other words, education
favours the economic dimension (Figure 1) at the expense of social and
environmental dimensions (Fien, 1993). Sterling (2001) further argues that this view
is informed by fundamentally mechanistic worldviews that are largely ignorant of
the sustainability issues that increasingly impact on people’s lives. Education for
sustainability challenges this dominant economic paradigm (Chapman, 2004), and
the educational responses that this has generated. Formal, informal and non-formal
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 28 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
education and learning processes for sustainability need to be strengthened and
prioritised within the education sector (The Centre for Environment & Sustainability,
2009). As Fien (2004) states:
The aim of education for sustainability is to develop skills that can enable all citizens and, through them, our social institutions, to play a role in the transition to sustainability. As such, it encompasses a vision for society that is not only ecologically sustainable but also socially, economically, and politically sustainable. Thus, education for sustainability involves approaches to teaching and learning that integrate goals for conservation, social justice, appropriate development and democracy into a vision and a mission of personal and social change (p.186).
This is a broad agenda, somewhat at odds with educational imperatives focused
on employment and work skills. Stevenson (2007) describes classrooms and schools
as not intended to develop critical thinkers or problem-solvers but rather, they
reproduce existing social conditions. Nevertheless, a number of recent initiatives
have contributed to the development of education for sustainability in Australian
education. It is important to note, however, that these initiatives have originated
from the environmental field rather than from the education field. These Australian
Government initiatives include: Living Sustainably: the Australian Government's
National Action Plan for Education for Sustainability (Australian Government,
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population & Communities,
2000), the National Environmental Education Network (established in 2001), the
Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES) established in
2004, the National Action Plan for Sustainable Development (Australian
Government, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population &
Communities, 2007), and the Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative (Australian
Government, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population &
Communities, 2008). While these initiatives continue to show growth in policy
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 29 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
development around sustainability, the reality is that action based on these policies
has been inadequate.
Most recently, the Australian Government (2009) released Living Sustainably, its
National Action Plan for Education for Sustainability, a second action plan which
“builds on the foundation laid by the first plan released in 2000 and represents a
significant contribution to Australia's participation in the United Nations Decade of
Education for Sustainable Development, 2005-2014” (para. 7). This plan aims to
equip all Australians with the knowledge and skills to live sustainably. The
framework has four key strategies that respond to the needs and priorities of
education for sustainability. These are: demonstrating Government leadership in
education for sustainability, reorienting education systems to a culture of
sustainability, fostering sustainability in business and industry, and harnessing
community spirit to act (Australian Government, 2009). The principles of education
for sustainability, as defined by the Australian National Action Plan, are summarised
as: transformation and change, lifelong learning for all, systems thinking –
interconnected environmental, economic, social and political systems; envisioning a
better future, critical thinking and reflection, participation and creating partnerships
for change (Australian Government, 2009). This action plan, in particular, provides
guidelines for teachers across Australia as they engage with the National curriculum
and its sustainability focus. The plan will be instrumental in guiding the uptake of
education for sustainability and reorienting existing environmental education
practices. The next section looks at education for sustainability and environmental
education in more depth.
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 30 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
History of Environmental Education and Education for Sustainability
This section examines the history of education for sustainability, explains its
theoretical underpinnings and discusses its characteristics. Environmental education,
the precursor of education for sustainability, has had a short and rapidly evolving
history, as the change in terminology reflects.
It is argued in this thesis, however, that a contemporary conceptualisation of
education for sustainability is now required. The current sustainability agenda
challenges the earlier focus of environmental education to move beyond nature
learning and individual action-taking, such as planting trees, towards a more
participatory and decision-making approach (Australian Government, 2005a). This
shift in focus is reflected in Figure 2 (Australian Government, Department of the
Environment & Heritage, 2005a).
Figure 2. Evolution of EE Approaches in Policy (Australian Government
Department of the Environment & Heritage, 2005a, p. 26).
In the 1970s environmental education (EE) focused mainly on knowledge
acquisition, especially knowledge about natural systems such as the carbon or water
cycle. In the 1980s, approaches to environmental education encouraged
environmental and nature experiences, that is a great deal of teaching and learning
occurred within the natural environment. In the 1990s, environmental education
Evolution of Environmental Education Approaches in Policy
1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s About In For Sustainability (knowledge) (experience) (action) (participation)
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 31 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
encouraged action for the environment such as tree planting and waste management
with approaches that began to promote sustainability through participation. Such
action-oriented approaches were aimed at encouraging learners to be both reflective
of and responsible for their own actions in relation to the environment. In the 2000s,
approaches to education for sustainability encourage transformative teaching and
learning where children are deeply involved in decision-making and are encouraged
to work with their broader communities to enact positive environmental, social and
economic change.
The following diagram (Figure 3), adapted from Hart (1997), also demonstrates
the evolution of environmental education focused on the natural environment
(indicated by green) which has broadened to become education for sustainability,
which includes the environmental focus but has additional foci on social problems,
local history and culture, political knowledge and aesthetic appreciation of the
environment, indicated by turquoise. The second oval around the ‘environmental’
oval is both turquoise and green to indicate its historical significance and continuing
importance within sustainability.
Political Ecological
EconomicSocial
Traditional
environmental
education
Contemporary
education for
sustainabilityEnvironmental
Figure 3. Early environmental education and contemporary education for
sustainability (adapted from Hart, 1997, p.59).
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 32 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
A criticism of environmental education is that, since its inception, it has struggled
to become mainstream, mandatory and of high status within the Australian education
system. Although increasing in importance, education for sustainability is still not
considered an integral component of education (Australian Government, 2009) as
evidenced by the fact that most recent initiatives emerge from Departments of
Environment and not from Departments of Education. Nevertheless, education for
sustainability has gained legitimacy in Australian State and Territory school
curricula through Studies of Society and Environment and, more recently, through
the Australian national curriculum. However, the presence of education for
sustainability, in early childhood contexts and curriculum, is less evident (Edwards
& Cutter-Mackenzie, 2011). Early childhood education for sustainability remains an
emergent area with meagre research (Davis, 2009). As a consequence, appropriate
education resources and education/excursion venues designed to meet the specific
needs of young children, are generally lacking (Davis & Elliott, 2003). This lack of
application, coordination and cohesion within the field of early childhood education
for sustainability is unlikely to be resolved while research and policy in the field
remains limited (Davis, 2009).
Critical Theory and Environmental Education
As mentioned in the introduction, education for sustainability, particularly as
practised in Australia, has been informed largely by critical theory (Fien, 1993;
Elliott & Davis, 2009). This is unsurprising given that sustainability is concerned
with creating social change. Critical theory has been informed by various discourses
and theoretical insights that endeavour to find new ways of understanding power,
oppression and their impact on humanity, as well as ways to bring about change
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 33 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Marx, Horkheimer, Adorno and Habermas of the Frankfurt school (Crotty, 1998),
Freire and Giroux.
Critical theorists question educational knowledge and practices that serve to
reproduce the status quo rather than question and explore issues including power,
justice, social class, ethnicity and equality (Giroux, 1983; Sung, 2007). Giroux
(1983) describes critical theory as encouraging the development of critical skills that
lead to positive change and opportunities for autonomy. Critical theorists view
educational facilities, such as schools, as inextricably linked to issues involving
power, gender and race, and inequality where children are shaped through
standardised curriculum and processes (McLaren, 2003). Giroux (1983) states that:
Unlike traditional and liberal accounts of schooling, with their emphasis on historical continuities and historical development, critical theory points educators towards a mode of analysis that stresses the breaks, discontinuities and tensions in history, all of which become valuable in that they highlight the centrality of human agency and struggle while simultaneously revealing the gap between the society as it presently exists and society as it might be (p.30).
Critical theory is ‘suspicious’ of the constructed meanings that culture passes on
to us. These constructed meanings reproduce existing power structures, inequities
and social injustices (Crotty, 1998; Giroux, 2006). Gough (1997) describes a
‘socially critical curriculum’ where children are engaged in social practices and
structures immediately, not just prepared for later participation (in adulthood). This
form of curriculum is characterised by active and experiential learning where
children are encouraged to think critically and are empowered to shape their own
lives. A socially critical curriculum is based on the social framework of the learner
with the teacher as the coordinator with an emancipatory aim to involve children in
negotiations.
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 34 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Creating Change
Critical theorists are also concerned with creating social change; finding better
ways to think and behave (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009) with the goal of bringing
about positive change. For example questioning or thinking differently, in the
education context, potentially leads to acting differently, to engage and to be
accountable (Giroux, 2006). Marshall and Rossman (1999) describe critical theorists
as increasingly demanding that research have liberatory potential. As Crotty (1998)
explains, critical theory seeks to change a situation whereas traditional theory
reflects a current situation.
This study features change as a recurrent theme. It is argued here that children
and teacher understandings and participation are enhanced by insights from critical
theory. For the purposes of this study then, critical theory contributes the core
concepts of empowerment and agency, critical thinking and taking action. The aim
of the study was to create change in the teacher-researcher’s own practices so that
education for sustainability became an integral component of my early childhood
education practices, where young children could act as agents for change in
proactive ways for the environment. Underpinning these changes were challenges to
the status quo of my own teaching philosophy and practices.
Empowerment and Agency
Agency is concerned with empowerment, shared decision-making and action-
taking (Hazer Sancar & Can Servcan, 2010). In order to meet the sustainability
challenge, it is imperative to implement teaching approaches that encourage
children’s agency, empowerment, shared decision-making and action-taking.
Pramling Samuelsson and Kaga (2008) believe society urgently requires new kinds
of education that will help prevent further degradation of the planet and will foster
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 35 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
responsible stewardship and contributions to a just and peaceful world. Fien (2004)
states that “education for sustainability requires approaches to teaching and learning
that enhance knowledge and understanding, promote ethical and critical reasoning,
as well as motivate and equip young people to participate in community affairs”
(p.193), rather than teaching approaches that merely serve to replicate existing social
and cultural conventions. Developing integrated education for sustainability in early
childhood requires changed practices from the traditional environment and nature
focus to more participatory engagement. This means enabling young children to
exercise agency, it requires change in power dynamics and teaching and learning
practices. This is discussed next.
MacNaughton and Williams (2009) state that “to empower means to give others
the power (or ability) to do something” (p. 311). These authors point out that
empowerment involves people who have power giving that power to others who do
not have power; a transfer of power from the powerful to the powerless, this is
necessary in situations where an unequal distribution exists. They describe this
power as cultural, political, economic or social between people. McLaren (2003)
defines empowerment as a process where children learn to question and acquire
strategies to transform rather than conform. As a teaching technique, empowerment
is associated with critical, transformative, anti-bias or emancipatory approaches to
education (MacNaughton & Williams, 2009).
Critical Thinking
Thinking critically is seen as being grounded in critical theory (Hoepper & Vick,
2004). Tilbury and Wortman (2004) discuss thinking critically as a process that
helps to uncover how culture has shaped human values and beliefs. These authors
also point out that critical thinking does not mean being critical in relation to
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 36 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
sustainability; it is a much more profound process involving deep examinations of
power, consumption and the root causes of unsustainability. Critical thinking
involves critiquing, analysing and engaging with knowledge rather than mere
acceptance (Giroux, 2003) and allows better understanding (MacNaughton &
Hughes, 2009). Tilbury and Wortman (2004) state that:
Critical thinking involves asking deeper questions about the world we live in, and answering them in ways that reveal how our social, political and economic
structures and processes might be changed to move towards sustainability (p.34).
Taking action
Roe (2007) describes children as often disempowered from decision-making and
action-taking processes as they are viewed as ‘citizens in waiting’ rather than as
participants. Actively addressing sustainability in early childhood education
contexts has the potential to improve lives now as well as in the future, as do
teaching and learning approaches that empower children to be agents of change.
Transformative education approaches support children to take action in their own
environments (Davis, 2010). Young children are encouraged to “…challenge
unsustainable thinking and practices, and [be] include[d] in putting [their] ideas into
actions” (Davis, 2010, p.37).
Teaching approaches for education for sustainability should include democratic,
innovative and participatory strategies. Lang (2005) describes effective education
for sustainability as centering the learner in the learning process for transformational
change in thinking, learning and proactive environmental action. The United
Nation’s Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (DESD, 2005-2014)
suggests enhancing existing educational approaches by implementing innovative and
active teaching and learning. Hence, it promotes interdisciplinary and holistic
learning, rather than subject-based and values-based learning, and critical thinking
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 37 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
rather than transmissive forms of learning. It also supports multi-method approaches
including word, art, drama, debate, participatory decision-making and learning about
locally relevant information. Education for sustainability also involves approaches
to teaching and learning that integrate goals for conservation, social justice,
appropriate development and democracy through personal and social change and
empowerment (Fien, 2004). This represents a distinct broadening of the foci of
earlier environmental education practices.
Teachers are integral to this process because of their significant influences on
children (Pramling Samuelsson & Kaga, 2008). Teaching approaches need to
encourage participation, action, critical thinking and empowerment. Hopwood
(2007) states that “if we are to understand how environmental learning takes place,
and what its outcomes are, we must pay greater attention to the role of the learner as
an active agent in environmental education” (p.462). Hopwood also states that
children can imbue learning experiences with environmental significance even when
none was intended. It is in the early childhood period that children develop their
basic values, attitudes, skills, behaviours and habits, which may be long lasting and
may, therefore, have enormous potential to foster values, attitudes, skills and
behaviours that also support sustainability (Pramling Samuelsson & Kaga, 2008). In
this study it is argued that in early childhood children can also develop action taking.
Taking action is a key feature of education for sustainability. Children take action
when they engage in transformative teaching and learning. The study aimed at
maximising children’s participation and decision-making, in other words,
encouraging children to take action for the environment and sustainability.
Within transformative teaching and learning approaches the teacher is engaged in
a continual cycle of reflective practice and evaluation alongside the children.
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 38 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Teachers who operate within a transformative framework provide children with
opportunities to follow open-ended and self-directed paths of learning which make
links with children’s experiences and issues, explore alternative ways of thinking
about issues and give children power (MacNaughton, 2003). As Fien (2004) states:
Whatever sustainable development themes and topics are adopted, or whatever curriculum structures are adopted, the teacher’s beliefs and attitudes, together with the teaching strategies chosen, will significantly affect the nature of students’ learning experiences and the objectives achieved. Such choices and attitudes determine whether or not curriculum plans reproduce the existing social and cultural mores, or contribute to empowering people for participation in civil society, as do the styles of communication in and beyond the school (p.193).
As discussed earlier, early childhood education has been slow to respond to
sustainability or to engage with education for sustainability in the ways discussed
above. The field of early childhood is yet to develop a comprehensive and cohesive
approach to education for sustainability. There are some exemplars where education
for sustainability has become an embedded component within early childhood
practice. However, these exemplars are discussed later in this chapter. These are the
exceptions rather than the rule. The Australian Government (2009) recognises that
research is required in order to identify best practice and to guide policy
development for educational responses to sustainability issues. It is suggested, in
this study, that this process should begin in early childhood education.
Early Childhood Education
Unlike education for sustainability, early childhood education in Australia has a
long and evolving history spanning more than one hundred and fifty years. It has
been influenced by a number of theories and approaches, particularly developmental
and learning theories (Edwards, 2005). As mentioned earlier, Froebel is credited
with founding the kindergarten movement, the word ‘kindergarten’ meaning
children’s garden (Dombkowski, 2002) which is significant for this study due to its
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 39 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
interest, amongst other key concerns, in re-establishing children’s connections with
nature and participation in environmental and sustainability issues.
Early childhood education is known for its child-centred pedagogy, an enduring
and revered concept (Langford, 2010). The intertwined notions of children, play and
nature are historically evident in early childhood education (Elliott, 2010) and
continue to form a significant part of early childhood education. Davis (2010b)
describes contemporary early childhood services as ‘quite good’ at providing
outdoor environmental play and ‘reasonable’ about setting up the conditions for
learning experiences about the environment. Active participation in learning is
another espoused characteristic of early childhood education, but enactment of this
principle is rather less developed (Theobald, Danby & Ailwood, 2011).
The mid 1960s saw early childhood education become more influenced by social
policy and developmental psychology, stemming from concern about child poverty,
and the notion that intelligence is not fixed but influenced by environment (Spodek
& Saracho, 2003). The first mass program of early intervention began in the 1960s
(Head Start in America) (Spodek & Saracho, 2003). Program models were based on
Piagetian theory, behavioural analysis theory and direct instruction models. The
primary goal of early childhood education was the promotion of cognitive
development and basic academic skills (Spodek & Saracho, 2003).
In July 1996 the American National Association for the Education of Young
Children adopted the position statement – Developmentally Appropriate Practice
(DAP) in early childhood programs for children from birth through age 8. This
well-known and influential position statement was predominantly conceived by
maturationist and constructivist influences, essentially a stage-based view of child
development that has been a predominant paradigm influencing early childhood
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 40 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
education in western developed countries including Australia. Developmentally
appropriate practice has since been challenged, and, although Piaget’s stage-based
view of child development is no longer in vogue (Clyde, 1995), his ideas about
knowledge construction continue to influence current early childhood education by
the provision of experiences and materials for children to learn through the
manipulation of concrete materials. More recently, co-constructivist approaches
have been added to the suite of ideas about individually constructed knowledge. Co-
constructivist approaches feature in the two curriculum documents that govern the
kindergarten where this study took place.
The Kindergarten’s Early Childhood Curriculum
To give context to the study, the two major curriculum documents that govern the
kindergarten where this research study took place, are now discussed. These two
Australian curriculum documents are primarily C&K’s (formerly known as Creche
& Kindergarten Association) Building Waterfalls (2011) and, of secondary
significance, the Belonging, Being and Becoming. Early Years Learning Framework
(Australian Government, DEEWR, 2009). C&K’s Building Waterfalls curriculum
(2011) embodies learning through play and active participation for young children
who are viewed as competent and capable. It is informed by readiness,
developmental, socio-cultural and critical reflection theoretical perspectives.
Curriculum approaches include learning through play, co-construction of knowledge
and teachers as facilitators (C&K, 2011). Children are recognised as being engaged
in learning from birth, as expressing and engaging in learning through a multiplicity
of ways that are connected with prior, present and future experiences. The Building
Waterfalls curriculum is built around four currents of thought which are connecting,
enlarging, listening, and exploring. Under each ‘current of thought’ are three shared
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 41 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
understandings, these can be found in Appendix 2. Building Waterfalls supports the
use of a Project Approach in early childhood education.
Guiding all early childhood education (non-formal education occurring before
compulsory schooling) in Australia is the newly introduced Belonging, Being and
Becoming. The Early Years Learning Framework (Australian Government,
DEEWR, 2009). This framework has a strong emphasis on play-based learning and
actively discusses children constructing knowledge through active participation. It
has five key learning outcomes which include: 1. children have a strong sense of
identity; 2. children are connected with and contribute to their world; 3. children
have a strong sense of wellbeing; 4. children are confident and involved learners;
and, 5. children are effective communicators (Australian Government, DEEWR,
2009). Hence it resonates with C&K’s Building Waterfalls.
In addition, since the early 1990s, early childhood education has been influenced
by the programs of Reggio Emilia (Italy). The curriculum of early childhood
programs in the town of Reggio Emilia advocate emergent and project-based
approaches to teaching and learning for young children (Gandini, 1993). Teachers
act as facilitators who scaffold ideas from the children (Gandini, 1993) and active
exploration and creativity are encouraged (Malaguzzi, 1993). The Reggio Emilia
approach is heavily embedded with the principles of constructivism, democracy,
open interchange of ideas and theories; the child is viewed as rich in potential,
powerful, competent and connected to others (Malaguzzi, 1993). The Reggio Emilia
approach has had significant influence over contemporary early childhood education
extending through to C&K’s Building Waterfalls, the principle curriculum
framework that informs the research site. All of these approaches are underpinned
by co-constructivist theory. This is discussed next.
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 42 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Co-constructivist Theory and Early Childhood Education
The key assumptions underpinning co-constructivist theory are child co-
construction of knowledge based on what is already known and experienced,
facilitated learning, children’s projects and documentation (Morrison, 2007).
Jenkins (2009) states that “although constructivists’ views differ from whether
children develop cognitively as individuals who interact with their environment, or
within a social context via interpersonal interaction, all share the belief that children
are actively involved in constructing meaning” (p.31). Three key writers within this
paradigm are Piaget, Vygotsky and Dewey (Morrison, 2007). Piaget (1951) focused
on the individual’s construction of knowledge occurring as an individual passes
through identifiable developmental stages. Vygotsky (1997) focused on construction
of knowledge that results from social participation, believing that education is
largely determined by the social environment in which a person grows and develops.
Dewey (1944) focused on socially active and constructive learning.
The significance of social context is viewed differently amongst some of the key
theorists. To summarise these differences Dockett and Perry (1996) state that “for
Piaget, the importance of the social context was that it provided children with a
means of testing the knowledge they had constructed. For Vygotsky, the social
context is both the source and the cultural repository for the learning” (p.8), whereas
Dewey (1944) believed that education should not be a matter of ‘passive absorption’
or ‘being told’, but rather education should be an active and constructive process
within social contexts.
For the purposes of this study the focus was on the learning that occurs in the
social context of a kindergarten classroom. Therefore, Vygotsky was of particular
importance. Vygotsky believes that children construct knowledge through their
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 43 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
active social and cultural participation; that by working and exploring ideas
collectively, learning is more influential and effectual (Jenkins, 2009). Vygotsky
stresses the importance of play to enhance conceptual development and meaning-
making. His view is that knowledge is constructed as a result of social interaction
and then internalised by individuals. Internalisation of knowledge is different for
each individual and information cannot by internalised without active engagement by
the learner (Dockett & Perry, 1996; Watters & Diezmann, 1998).
Co-constructivist approaches have influenced early childhood curriculum and are
intended to provide children with opportunities to cooperate, explore meaningfully
and develop critical and creative thinking skills (Watters & Diezmann, 1998). Co-
constructivist epistemology highlights knowledge as a human production (Dunne,
Pryor & Yates, 2005) with Bencze (2005) describing co-constructivism as the
building or constructing “that occurs in people’s minds when they learn” (para.1).
Put simply, co-constructivist approaches to teaching and learning are based on the
belief that knowledge is constructed through socially active involvement on the part
of learners.
In summary, co-constructivist learning theory suggests a number of points about
teaching and learning including that: learners have ideas; learners’ ideas are not
necessarily the same as the teachers’ ideas; learners need ‘first-hand’ experiences;
learner inquiry is self-fulfilling; learners need other people; learners see what they
want to see; often learners are not aware of what they already know; learners might
not discover known conclusions; learners need to learn how to learn; and, learners
have the right to determine their beliefs (Bencze, 2005). Co-constructivist
approaches differ from more traditional approaches where the learner is the receiver
of knowledge (often ‘teacher talk’ followed by regurgitation of knowledge by
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 44 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
children), rather than an active participant in constructing and discovering for
themselves through ‘hands-on’ experiences (Watters & Diezmann, 1998).
Of significance for this study is the work of Dewey (1944), an influential educator
often associated with progressive education in the 1930s and 1940s, who advocated
for child-centred approaches and the use of project work for children. MacNaughton
and Williams (2009) describe Dewey as an educator who believed that individuals
should be nurtured through individualised learning and small group project-based
learning rather than traditional standardised whole class tasks. Glassman and
Whaley (2000) are also advocates of long-term projects (based on Dewey’s
educational philosophy) rather than more goal dominated forms of education. These
authors describe Dewey as believing that education is continuous with knowledge
emerging from everyday inquiry, meaning making and understanding. This then
forms the platform on which further learning is built. Hill, Stremmel and Fu (2005)
state that “Dewey described the creation of a community for learning in which
communication, shared interest, and activity are given purpose through social
interaction” (p.14). Meyers (2006) describes Dewey as advocating curriculum
content that could improve lives, developing educational methods that could redefine
society by focusing on the learner making sense of the world and empower them to
improve their own and the common good; ideas that are resonant with education for
sustainability.
The educator’s role, when a co-constructivist Project Approach is adopted, is to
facilitate learning rather than to teach directly (MacNaughton, 2003). This is a non-
directive approach because the teacher does not impart knowledge but scaffolds
learning initiated by children. In other words teachers facilitate investigations that
originate from children’s thoughts rather than from the teacher (Clark, 2006). In
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 45 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
essence the teacher participates in learning alongside the children (MacNaughton &
Williams, 2009), encouraging them to construct knowledge for themselves rather
than reciting what a teacher has imparted to them (MacNaughton, 2003). Teachers
behave as guides while the learning environment provides for self-discovery
(MacNaughton, 2003). The teacher carefully prepares the environment to facilitate
teaching strategies such as resource selection, classroom organisation, intentional
exchanges (interactions planned by teachers) and observations related to the topic of
interest (MacNaughton & Williams, 2009). The following section discusses the
Project Approach which is designed to facilitate children’s learning.
The Project Approach
This section defines and discusses the Project Approach. Then, its typical format
is outlined and the lack of Australian examples of the Project Approach is pointed
out. Documentation of children’s learning, a key feature of the Project Approach, is
also defined, described and discussed. This style of teaching and learning seeks to
provide children with open-ended, child initiated opportunities for learning. It
recognises that young children co-construct knowledge through environmental and
social interactions, active, engaging and meaningful experiences (Clark, 2006; Harris
Helm & Gronlund, 2000). The Project Approach is not new to early childhood
education; in fact, as mentioned earlier, it has been part of progressive education for
over 80 years (Spodek & Saracho, 2003; McAninch, 2000). The Project Approach
reflects a progressive ideology with its roots in the work of Dewey (Spodek &
Saracho, 2003). The teacher’s role within the Project Approach is that of co-learner
and collaborator alongside children with the young viewed as competent, capable
and able to direct their own learning. In-depth investigation of significant topics that
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 46 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
help strengthen child curiosity through application of social, scientific, literacy,
creative and numeracy skills are advocated (Bullard & Bullock, 2002).
Chard (2011) defines a project “as an in-depth investigation of a real world topic
worthy of children’s attention and effort” (para. 1). A project generally begins from
an observed child interest and throughout the course of the project the teacher assists
children to explore this interest in a variety of ways suggested by the child
participants. This teaching and learning cycle is a continuous and ongoing process.
During the project, artifacts such as children’s drawings and photographs of
activities are kept as records of learning and discovery. Harris Helm and Katz
(2011) define the Project Approach as providing structure rather than a
‘prescription’. Although emergent in nature, a project would typically follow this
format:
Phase 1: Introductory phase
• An ‘interest web’ might be recorded (word and/or picture)
• Questions might be listed – ‘what do we want to know?’
• A list of ‘what we already know’ might be recorded
Phase 2: Synthesising phase
• In-depth exploration of interest area through a variety of open-ended
methods
Phase 3: Culminating phase
• A way of communicating what has been discovered during the course
of the project – this might involve displaying documentation (Katz &
Chard, 2000; Chard, 2011; Sloane, 2004).
Teachers who implement the Project Approach in their classrooms must consider
the implications that such an approach may have. They may have to relinquish some
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 47 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
decision making by empowering the children to control their own learning, allowing
children to initiate learning experiences and not giving children the answers; instead
teachers act as guide, resource and co-questioner alongside the children (Harris Helm
& Gronlund, 2000). The Project Approach is often described as offering muiltiple
ways for teachers to assist children to reach a high level of interest, develop intrinsic
motivation and work to high standards. Children are described as initiating project
work, asking researchable questions, and undertaking individual and collaborative
investigations that are structured to achieve high standards of learning (Chard, 2011).
Although there is quite a deal of literature pertaining to the positives of the
Project Approach, there are few examples of the Project Approach involving
sustainability issues and participation particularly for children under the age of five.
Clark (2005) points out that, generally speaking, most existing literature pertaining
to children’s participation, focuses on children aged five years and above. Chard
(2011) does make reference to project work raising awareness about ‘green issues’
on her website ‘The Project Approach’. This study, however, is concerned with
more than raising awareness of green issues. It is concerned with action-taking and
creating change. It is also difficult to find practical published Australian examples of
the Project Approach.
Documentation
A key feature of the Project Approach is documentation; this is now discussed.
The term ‘documentation’ refers to the variety of flexible record-keeping strategies
used in educational approaches; these strategies reflect the facilitated learning and
active participation that occur when approaches, such as the Project Approach, are
utilised. Such strategies are designed to accurately reflect the unique nature of what
a child or children have explored through the course of their learning. Katz and
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 48 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Chard (1994) describe six ways that documentation contributes to early childhood
programs. They are: enhancement of children’s learning; taking children’s ideas and
work seriously; teacher planning and evaluation with children; parent appreciation
and participation; teacher research and process awareness; and children’s learning
being made visible. In summary, documentation enables children’s learning to
become visible through the inclusion of evidence about children’s thoughts,
experiences, ideas, representational work, photographs, narratives and transcriptions
of their comments (Bullard & Bullock, 2002).
The use of documentation within the Project Approach also reflects various
learning styles. While one child may represent his or her learning by building a
model (perhaps with a photo for evidence) another may represent their learning
through role-play (perhaps with a written anecdotal record by the teacher). The high
level of children’s participation is also reflected in documentation that records their
thinking, changes and actions. MacNaughton (2003) states that “traditional
approaches to observation and assessment deprive children of the right to be heard”
(p.149). Millikan (2003), on the other hand, states that “documentation provides us
with a tool for being advocates for the rights of the child” (p.102). Documentation
positions both the child and the teacher as active participants in knowledge
construction; for the child the documentation is about their learning and for the
teacher it is about understanding how and what the children are learning (Edwards,
2005). Forman and Hall (2005) also assert that teachers can gain insight into
children’s thinking through observation and documentation. They state that:
Children are competent learners, but as teachers, we have to slow down, carefully observe, and study our documented observations in order to understand the ideas that they are attempting to convey. In addition to slowing down, observing, and studying children’s actions and narration, understanding children’s theories requires a general knowledge of child development and a willingness to speculate (para 10).
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 49 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Documentation is not a prescriptive process; it reflects learning that has been co-
constructed and is an alternative to more traditional methods of student assessment
(Harris Helm & Gronlund, 2000). Portfolios are collections of various
documentation. For example, a portfolio might contain photographs, work samples,
transcripts of student talk and anecdotes. These may reflect individual and social
learning experiences. Therefore, a group of children involved in the same project
may share similar artifacts. Although difficult to quantify, portfolios are a valuable
source of qualitatively different types of data (Mills, 2003).
Documentation is a key feature of the Project Approach and co-constructivist
teaching. It allows the focus to be on children’s strengths rather than deficits (Wilks,
2002), as evidence of what children can do is recorded rather than what they cannot
do. C&K’s Building Waterfalls curriculum (2011) advocates the use of
documentation as a powerful tool in recording both adult and children’s learning
(Geist & Baum, 2005). It is argued in this study that co-constructivist teaching, such
as the Project Approach and the accompanying children’s documentation of the
learning in a project, can enhance the fusing of the two fields; education for
sustainability and early childhood education.
Education for Sustainability and Early Childhood Education: Synthesising the
Fields
This section examines the short history of early childhood education for
sustainability (ECEfS), explains that early childhood education for sustainability is
largely undertheorised and then discusses what its characteristics might be. It
illustrates that, although early childhood education should be the ‘natural starting
point’ for environmental education and education for sustainability, as recommended
in the Gothenburg Recommendations (2008), it has not kept up with other education
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 50 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
sectors in incorporating education for sustainability into curricula and little attention
has been paid to early childhood education’s role in education for sustainability
(Johansson, 2009). Reasons for the slow response to the sustainability challenge by
early childhood education are outlined and young children’s potential to contribute
to sustainability is illustrated. Recent initiatives, including publications, case studies,
conferences and exemplars that relate to early childhood education for sustainability,
are also identified. This discussion concludes by recognizing the need for early
childhood education for sustainability to become mainstream.
Early childhood is generally referred to as the greatest and most significant period
of development, often regarded as the foundation on which the rest of life is built
(Australian Government, 2005; OECD, 2006). Therefore, it is the logical and natural
starting point for education for sustainability given its significance (The Centre for
Environment & Sustainability, 2009). However, rather than being the starting point,
the early childhood field has not kept up with other education sectors in
incorporating education for sustainability into curriculum (Elliott & Davis, 2009).
Further, there is little research evidence to support its uptake.
Embedded in concerns about education for sustainability in early childhood
education is a need to reverse the current trend of children leading increasingly
indoor existences (Davis & Elliott, 2003) and to rekindle children’s relationships
with nature. Positive interactions with the natural environment are an important part
of healthy child development and such interactions can enhance overall quality of
life (Cooke, 2010; Wilson, 2008). Kinsella (2007) concurs, stating that “there is
mounting evidence that connecting children to the natural world through early
education programs and environments enhances and enriches learning, and is
essential for healthy development” (p.1). Chawla and Flanders Cushing (2007)
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 51 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
point out that childhood experiences in nature contribute to pro-environmental
attitudes and lifestyles in later life. It is argued here that children should develop a
sense of respect and care for the natural environment or risk never developing such
attitudes as adults. Wilson (2008) continues, though, by explaining that young
children should not be expected to ‘watch and listen’, but rather to participate in
caring for and respecting the natural environment as well as observing sustainable
practices modeled by others.
Children today spend less time in the outdoor environment compared with
children from previous generations (Elliott, 2010; Louv, 2006; Morrison, 2007).
However, one of the main ways that children obtain environmental knowledge and
learning is by engaging in activities such as climbing, digging and balancing within
outdoor environments (Cosco, 2007) as this kind of outdoor play helps establish
connections with nature and combats development of sedentary lifestyles later on
(Cosco, 2007). As Young (2007) states:
Australian children are increasingly spending less time in the great outdoors due to fears about safety, hygiene and other perceived risks. A child playing outside is part of Australia’s cultural heritage; and a sustainable program ensures that children develop connections with the natural world and enjoy many of the activities that past generations took for granted, such as climbing trees, finding frogs and making mud pies (p.3).
Potentially compounding the problem of children having reduced opportunities to
obtain environmental knowledge (due to spending less time outdoors), is early
childhood teacher reluctance to include education for sustainability into the
curriculum. Elliott and Davis (2009) describe early childhood educator impressions
of education for sustainability as too negative and overwhelming a topic for young
children. Other barriers include: inadequate pre-service teacher education; a lack of
an agreed upon approach/framework for education for sustainability; that
sustainability is not well understood by the early childhood sector (Davis, 2009); a
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 52 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
lack of research to inform the field of early childhood education; and the lack of
recognition that early childhood has a significant role to play (Pramling Samuelsson
& Kaga, 2008). Meaningful, positive and appropriate ways to integrate education
for sustainability into early childhood education positively and constructively must
be established.
Although awareness about the importance of education for sustainability is
growing, there is only a small body of literature pertaining to education for
sustainability for the early childhood age group. While there are some commendable
examples where education for sustainability is central to early childhood curriculum
ethos, efforts in education for sustainability are characterised as individual
practitioner or single, centre-based efforts rather than reflecting a coordinated
approach to education for sustainability across the early childhood sector.
Furthermore, although some individual early childhood educators have made some
significant contributions, these have mostly been in the form of unpublished centre
practices or practical publications rather than explored through researched activities
that have the potential for challenging current theory and practice.
Some of the few examples where education for sustainability has featured in
research are now discussed. In her study on Australian four and five year olds, Page
(2000) found that young children were already interested in current issues related to
the environment and pollution. Page (2000) conducted 40 interviews with 4 and 5
years old to investigate their impressions about the future. During these interviews
children spoke and drew about what they would be like in the future and what a
future world would be like. Page (2000) reports that many of the children’s
interviews demonstrated their strong awareness of global aspects of the future
including pollution and deforestation.
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 53 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Hicks and Holden (2007) also conducted a study into children’s thoughts about
the future. They used questionnaires with 552 primary school aged children in the
United Kingdom. Although these children were older than those in Page’s study,
Hicks and Holden also found that children demonstrated awareness of global issues.
The authors describe these as a ‘key concern’ (p.508) for children and stated that
“awareness that the future can hold both threat and promise begins in the early years
and continues into adulthood” (p.509).
An example, where sustainability practices were addressed and also recorded
through research in Australia, is Campus Kindergarten’s ‘Sustainable Planet
Project’. This Australian study found that participation in this project resulted in
significant reduction of waste, lower water and energy consumption and early
Knowledge exists outside of individuals and can be transferred from teachers to students.
Knowledge has personal meaning. It is can be created individually and socially. The teacher acts as a facilitator.
Knowledge is generated through student questioning, exploring issues, problems and critical thinking.
Students learn what they hear and what they read. If a teacher explains abstract concepts well, students will learn those concepts.
Students co-construct knowledge by looking for meaning and order; they interpret what they hear, read, and see based on their previous learning and habits. Students who do not have appropriate backgrounds will be unable to accurately “hear” or “see” what is before them.
Students learn through active participation, open interchange of ideas and opinions, exercising political literacy, challenging attitudes and values.
The learning process, rather than the product, is valued.
Learning is successful when students can repeat what was taught.
Learning is successful when students can demonstrate conceptual understanding.
Learning is successful when students can reason critically and problem-solve.
Conforming teaching
approach
Reforming teaching
approach
Transforming teaching
approach
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 57 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
instruction because of the belief that controlled environments led to controlled
learning (MacNaughton & Williams, 2009, p.321). The objectivist view holds that
knowledge can be passed on to someone who does not yet have that knowledge; the
teacher reveals knowledge to the child (Castillo & Marshall, 2003). In other words,
a conforming teaching approach to education for sustainability would involve
children repeatedly learning concepts about sustainability.
The second curriculum position MacNaughton (2003) describes is ‘reforming
society’. This position supports the belief that education can produce a ‘self-
governing’ child capable of independent thought as a result of individualised
curriculum content linked to needs and interests. In contrast to the objectivist view,
this co-constructivist view stems from progressive, child-centred philosophies of
early childhood and emphasises individual development in responsive environments
rather than the achievement of pre-set outcomes. This curriculum position aligns
with the work of Dewey and the Project Approach mentioned earlier. This co-
constructivist view holds that children construct knowledge that has meaning for
them, new learning builds on prior learning and children can demonstrate conceptual
understanding (Byrnes, 1996; Arseneau & Rodenburg, 1998). A reforming teaching
approach to education for sustainability would involve children co-constructing
knowledge and demonstrating their understanding about sustainability.
The third curriculum position discussed by MacNaughton (2003) is ‘transforming
society’ or a transformative approach. This position seeks to change existing
practices, rules, traditions and understandings in order to achieve greater equity and
social justice. Here teaching is spontaneous, flexible, sensitive and anti-bias in
nature (MacNaughton, 2003). A transformative teaching and learning approach
aligns with education for sustainability approaches of experiential learning, action-
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 58 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
taking and problem-solving. These strategies are derived from critical theory as they
are concerned with education that creates change, rather than maintaining the status
quo. Therefore, a transformative teaching approach to education for sustainability
would involve educators and children learning about concepts and working in
participatory ways, problem-solving and action-taking for sustainability. These
transformative approaches to education also involve empowerment and agency
(Centre for Environment & Sustainability, 2009), stemming from critical theory,
discussed earlier in relation to education for sustainability.
As Figure 4 shows, a number of sources have been used to compare and contrast
the three different approaches to teaching and learning. The objectivist and co-
constructivist columns are drawn from Byrnes (1996) and Arseneau and Rodenburg
(1998) and serve to contrast objectivist and co-constructivist approaches to teaching
and learning. The third column, ‘critical view’, represents an adaptation of ideas
from Fien (2004) and MacNaughton (2003). The bottom row (purple) represents
MacNaughton’s (2003) three approaches to teaching and learning.
As discussed previously, co-constructivist teaching is widely used and advocated
within current early childhood education. It is argued here, however, that a
pedagogical shift is required for education for sustainability to authentically become
part of early childhood education. Through transformative education practices,
young children can gain agency and take action in their own environments. Davis
(2007) describes transformative education as teaching and learning “that values,
encourages and supports children to be problem-seekers, problem-solvers and action-
takers in their own environments” (p.2).
Transformative teaching in early childhood rests on the belief that educators can
work with children and families to create a better world (MacNaughton, 2003).
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 59 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
MacNaughton (2003) states that “within this position, early education equips
children with the knowledge they require to recognise and confront injustice and to
resist oppressive ways of becoming” (p.183). While MacNaughton writes from a
social justice position I am extending her principles on transformative education to
education for sustainability through this study. Transformative teaching approaches
should contribute to a more just and wise society by offering diverse possibilities and
helping to develop the skills needed to create social change and emphasise non-
traditional knowledge (MacNaughton, 2003). It is anticipated that children and staff
who are engaged in planning and acting for sustainability will feel a sense of
personal responsibility which will carry over into interactions in the community and
workplace and help to develop a culture of sustainability in which education for
sustainaiblity is reinforced by continuous, positive improvement (Australian
Government, 2009).
Emerging Characteristics of Early Childhood Education for Sustainability
Children should have opportunities to interact and connect within their own
environments in order to develop meaningful understanding of the consequences of
sustainability issues. As Chawla (1999) states, those who learn about sustainable
living practices and establish a connection with nature are more likely to contribute
to a sustainable future. Gaul, Davis, Van de Graff and Elliott (2007) also state that it
is “during the early years the active, environmentally responsible, global citizen of
the future is created and nurtured. It is a time when the values, skills and
understandings about sustainability become the habits of a lifetime” (para. 6).
Wilson (2000) agrees, commenting that education for sustainability should begin in
the earliest years of life and should play a critical role in shaping lifelong attitudes
and behaviours towards natural environments. Early childhood educators, therefore,
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 60 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
should cater for frequency and quality of child-environment opportunities and
interactions. Of concern, though, are the barriers that prevent today’s children from
connecting and appreciating the world they live in and later inherit. Louv (2006)
writes eloquently about this idea stating that:
Within the space of a few decades, the way children understand and experience nature has changed radically. The polarity of the relationship has reversed. Today, kids are aware of the global threats to the environment – but their physical contact, their intimacy with nature, is fading (p.1).
Early childhood education for sustainability, therefore, is characterised by
teaching children to understand the balance of natural systems of the Earth as this is
a central component to achieving a sustainable society (Lowe, 2007). In the early
years young children develop basic skills and values, as well as behaviours and
habits which may last a lifetime, including those that support sustainable practices
(Pramling Samuelsson & Kaga, 2008). Nevertheless, simply connecting young
children with their environment is not enough for sustainable living. A
contemporary conceptualisation of early childhood education for sustainability that
fosters problem-solving, participation and empowerment is required (Davis, 2009).
For example, it is not enough for a child to know about water conservation issues, a
conforming to society approach; it is important that they also act upon this
knowledge (Davis & Elliott, 2003), a transforming approach. The Project Approach
is now explored as a potential pedagogical means for exploring sustainability.
The Project Approach in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability
The Project Approach offers a potential pedagogical means for embedding
education for sustainability in early childhood education. For example, for children
to learn about water conservation they could potentially engage in project work
around water and water conservation. Such project participation should involve
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 61 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
children in learning about water and water conservation (co-constructivism) and then
acting upon their learning (transformative education). Transformative teaching and
learning in early childhood education helps children to make wise choices (for
example to conserve water), and see sustainable living modelled within their early
childhood settings (Elliott, 2007). Such practices allow children to ‘experience’
sustainability in the present, as well as developing sustainable practices they can then
take into the future.
Conceptual Framework for this Study
This section explains the conceptual framework (Figure 5) which represents my
view of the current situation related to early childhood education and education for
sustainability. It also provides the theoretical underpinnings for the study. It has
been developed by integrating key insights from critical theory that inform education
for sustainability and co-constructivism that informs early childhood education. The
aim is to create a foundation on which to build early childhood education for
sustainability – a transformative education approach where children can construct
learning about sustainability and meaningfully enact it.
It is argued that the conceptual framework represents an appropriate ‘lens’
through which to view this research. The Centre for Environment and Sustainability
(2009) describes early childhood education for sustainability as having “the potential
to foster socio-environmental resilience based on interdependence and critical
thinking, setting foundations for lives characterised by self respect, respect for
others, and respect for the environment” (para. 3). Although my teaching was
influenced heavily by strongly held beliefs about children co-constructing and
‘driving’ their own learning, as I have explained, I have also recognised that this
failed to adequately address sustainability issues. Hence I examined my pedagogical
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 62 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
practices and developed this conceptual framework. Each component of the
conceptual framework is now discussed.
Figure 5. My Conceptual Framework: Young Children as Change Agents for
Sustainability
The reason for using a ‘Venn-style diagram’ as the conceptual framework is
twofold. First, it highlights shared concepts between the two fields of research
interest. Second, it represents the synthesis of the two fields which occurred in this
study. Thus, early childhood education is represented by the blue circle, and
education for sustainability is represented by the green circle. The smaller of these
two circles (green) is deliberately so to reflect my lesser experience with education
for sustainability. The larger circle (blue) represents the area where I have more
experience (early childhood education). Featured centrally within the framework are
the concepts shared by the two theoretical positions (turquoise ring) with, the study’s
research questions which are represented in the yellow ring. Action research,
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 63 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
discussed in chapter three, is the research methodology for this study and is therefore
represented by the orange circle within this conceptual framework. It is represented
centrally, as action research is the means that brings together each of the study’s
significant components. To reiterate, components of the conceptual framework are
represented here, in linear form, as follows:
Blue circle – Early childhood education
Insights drawn from co-constructivist theory perspective
• Co-construction of knowledge
• Facilitated learning
• The Project Approach
• Documentation
Green circle - Education for sustainability
Insights drawn from critical theory perspective
• Taking action
• Change
• Critical thinking
• Empowerment and agency
Turquoise circle – Shared concepts
Concepts shared between early childhood education and education for
sustainability
• Experiential learning
• Problem-solving
• Democratic practice
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 64 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Yellow circle – Research questions (Please note that the research questions are
abbreviated)
1. How does the Project Approach facilitate education for sustainability
2. What is the teacher’s learning journey?
3. Can children be social agents for change?
Orange circle – Young children as change agents for sustainability (Title)
Action research cycle:
1. Reflect
2. Raise questions
3. Plan to seek answers
4. Fieldwork/research
5. Data analysis
6. Think of new actions
As the insights drawn from co-constructivist theory (co-construction of
knowledge, facilitated learning, the Project Approach and documentation) and
critical theory (change, taking action, critical thinking, democracy, empowerment
and agency) have been addressed earlier in this chapter they will not be explained
again. The following chapter addresses the research methodology and two of the
three research questions. The third research question is discussed in the final
discussion. Following, therefore, is a discussion of the shared concepts of
experiential learning, problem solving and democratic practice (turquoise ring in my
conceptual framework model).
Experiential Learning
Walsh and Gardner (2005) summarise the key features of experiential learning as:
active engagement in learning; independence and a level of control over learning;
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 65 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
feeling secure within the learning environment; learning in social contexts; learning
that involves multiple skill acquisition and higher-order thinking skills (para 13).
Experiential learning has value for this study because of my interest in child-driven
learning in the social context of the kindergarten classroom.
Experiential learning features in both early childhood education and education for
sustainability, therefore an explanation of experiential learning is important.
Experiential learning: posits learning as a major determinant of human development;
determines personal development; is multilinear and influenced by life course and
learning style; is concerned with the learning process, creating knowledge and
interacting with the environment rather than the achievement of set outcomes (Kolb
and develops capacities for student identification of questions, issues and problems
as starting points for learning; active participation in meaningful learning;
application of a range of skills; open interchange of ideas and opinions; and,
exercising political literacy through understanding the world and knowledge about
how to participate in it.
Problem-solving
Problem solving also features in both early childhood education and education for
sustainability, therefore an explanation of problem solving is significant for this
study. Problem-solving is a foundation skill underpinning learning in and about the
world. Educators should provide an environment where children’s problem-solving
practices are encouraged and valued (MacNaughton & Williams, 2009). Problem-
solving, as a teaching technique, involves assisting children to learn how to find
answers. Chawla and Flanders Cushing (2007) state that “discussions within
supportive environments enable children and youth to consider a range of
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 66 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
perspectives, integrate what they hear and transform it into their own words, and
think through their own positions” (p. 442). Children are more likely to engage in
problem-solving if they have a personal sense of competence (Chawla & Flanders
Cushing, 2007).
Young children should develop problem-solving skills so that they can recognise
and manage sustainability issues positively. By paying greater attention to the
learner as an active agent in education for sustainability, teachers will develop
greater understanding about how environmental learning takes place (Hopwood,
2007). MacNaughton and Williams (2009) state that appropriate problems for
children to solve are those that are related to everyday experiences; sustainability
issues fit well within this criteria.
Democratic Practice
Dewey (1944) believed that democracy and education were interwoven. He
believed that education should not aim to reproduce the status quo (conservative
education), but rather education should seek to embrace change as well as break
down barriers such as class and race (progressive education). As also identified by
the critical theorists, progressive education does not seek to replicate the status quo;
rather it seeks to shape the experiences of the young in such a way that better habits
are formed and future society is an improvement (Dewey, 1944; Glassman &
Whaley, 2000). According to Dewey (1944) democracy repudiates principles of
external authority, preferring associated living and conjoint communicated
experiences. Of education that reproduces social inequality, he stated that “lack of
the free and equitable intercourse which springs from a variety of shared interests
makes intellectual stimulation unbalanced” (p.84-85). When discussing the
democratic conception in education, Dewey (1944) commented:
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 67 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
To say that education is a social function, securing direction and development in the immature through their participation in the life of the group to which they belong, is to say in effect that education will vary with the quality of life which prevails in a group. Particularly it is true that a society which not only changes but which has the ideal of such change as will improve it, will have different standards and methods of education from one which aims simply at the perpetuation of its own customs (p.81).
Democratic education, says Dewey (1944), cannot flourish when the chief
influences have utilitarian ends. As discussed earlier, current educational systems
favour economic dimensions (Sterling, 2001) rather than social and environmental
dimensions. Education for sustainability, therefore, should acknowledge the social
responsibilities of education presenting situations where problems are relevant to
living together, where observation and information develop social insight and
interest (Dewey, 1944). Opportunities for collaborative decision making enable
young people to exercise control of their environments and lives, so they can make
their own decisions based on information and discussions and hence, contribute to
authentic democracy (Chawla & Flanders Cushing, 2007). These ideas can
legitimately be updated to include environmental and sustainability issues.
The Conceptual Framework as a Theoretical Basis for the Study
The conceptual framework presented in this thesis provided a theoretical basis for
this study and represents a beginning point for theorising about early childhood
education for sustainability. At the core of this framework is child participation in
projects around environmental and sustainability topics using both critical and co-
constructivist insights. The conceptual framework (young children as change agents
for sustainability) and the chosen methodology (action research) align as they both
require a high level of participation (rather than passive engagement) by all
participants. As Fuzne Koszo (2006) states, “it is important therefore to stress that
environmental education is more of a journey rather than a destination. Children
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 68 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
learn about environmental education by being involved in the process” (p.114). It is
suggested that teachers, like myself, also learn more about education for
sustainability by being involved in the process alongside children. Action research
then was an appropriate methodology for this reason.
Chapter Summary
This chapter began by identifying the global consequences of unsustainable
practices. Current sustainability issues receiving attention include global warming,
unsafe water, unsustainable use of natural resources and reduced quality of human
life and health. Such issues have significance for both current and future
generations. This chapter acknowledged the right of young children to a sustainable
future. A sustainability agenda was described as a far reaching issue (Davis, 2007a)
with many implications for children and future generations.
Education’s role in addressing sustainability was also discussed, pointing out that
it is not enough to learn about the environment or in the environment. Learning
needs to be active and participatory; in other words learning for the environment.
Education should encourage teaching and learning that empowers current and future
generations to live sustainably as a matter of survival (Buchan, 2004). The chapter
described how education can be conforming, reforming or transforming
(MacNaughton, 2003). A transformative approach was described as the most
appropriate approach to address sustainability through education because it seeks to
change existing practices, rules, traditions and understandings in order to achieve
greater equity (Davis, 2007b; MacNaughton, 2003).
The issue of education for sustainability in the early childhood years was
addressed. The lack of environmental and sustainability education opportunities
within most early childhood contexts was reflected. The need for research in this
Chapter 2: The Sustainability Challenge and Early Childhood Education 69 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
area was identified. This chapter explored a potential shift in teaching by merging
early childhood education, largely characterised by co-constructivist approaches
(MacNaughton, 2003) with education for sustainability, largely characterised by
critical approaches (MacNaughton, 2003), to produce transformative education for
sustainability. The Project Approach was suggested as a potentially transformative
strategy. Complementary to the Project Approach is the teaching and learning
strategy of documentation. Documentation was explained as a way to ‘make
learning visible’. It is an alternative approach to traditional and standardised forms
of record-keeping about children’s progress.
To conclude the chapter, my conceptual framework was defined. This was
developed by combining key insights from co-constructivism and critical theory and
identifying shared concepts between the two fields. This framework was advanced
as potentially contributing to, or providing a foundation for, the field of early
childhood education for sustainability. This research, and the development of the
conceptual framework, responds to calls for research in this area. Research helps
develop a theorised foundation for ongoing early childhood education for
sustainability practices. The next chapter explores the methodology of the study.
impetus for further research involving early childhood education
for sustainability.
The overall action research cycle and the children’s environment project shared
common elements and, therefore, close synergy (Goodfellow, 2005). Figure 8
details the children’s environment project (Step 4). This project, a sub-cycle of the
larger action research case study, was formed around the teacher-researcher’s own
curriculum planning cycle and the Project Approach’s three phases. Figure 8
elaborates this sub-cycle by giving details about planned participant activities which
were outlined for each week of the children’s environment project.
Figure 8 includes the following components: the project-based learning phases,
the roles of the children, collaborative roles (undertaken by the teacher-researcher
and children together) and the teacher-researcher’s roles. These are now explained.
The Project Approach phases, introductory phase, synthesising phase and
culminating phase - are represented by underlined text. Weeks one and two (in
Figure 8) represent the introductory phase of the project and reflect the initial
planning stages about what will be learnt and possible ways to proceed. Weeks 3, 4
and 5 represent the synthesising phase of the project. In this phase, children and
teachers were actively involved in the project interest. Weeks 6 and 7 represent the
culminating project phase, where learning was evaluated and reflected upon, and
ideas for further learning were planned. Reflective and evaluative components of
this cycle provided catalysts for change and improvement (Arthur, Beecher, Death,
Dockett & Farmer, 2008).
WEEK 2 Introductory project phase Children interact with learning environment and
others. Children make predictions about topic
Provide learning environment, materials and resources to stimulate and enrich learning about EfS (based on observations). Intentional interactions around EfS Interact with each other and with the learning
environment, investigate topic of interest
Weeks 3 & 4 Synthesising project phase Children direct own learning, negotiate ways to explore
topic and represent learning/findings (Clark, 2006)
Continue to facilitate experiential learning, scaffold children’s interests, document experiences and encourage/assist children to take action related to EfS, engage in critical thinking. In collaboration plan what to do next, what do we
want to know? Where could we find out? Continue
investigations
Week 5 Synthesising project phase Children drive learning, ask questions,
explore interest & problem-solve
Co-learn, co-construct alongside children, participate in project work related to EfS, document & collect data
Collaborative involvement in
project-based learning, create
representations of findings
WEEK 1 Introductory project phase Children participate in program &
develop questions about topic
Reflect on observations of children engaging in/discussing/ exploring EfS, facilitate learning based on these observations.
Collaboratively select a topic of
interest
Figure 8. The children’s environment project
Intro
Weeks
1&2
Culm
Weeks
6&7
Synthesising
Weeks 3, 4 & 5
Week 7 Culminating project phase Children make new/revised plan based on
interests
Re-plan based on observations
Formulate new plan together
Week 6 Culminating project phase Children reflect on learning, re-visit
documentation
Analyse data, reflect
De-brief about learning implement changes
based on learning
LEGEND Project phases represented by underlined text Children represented
The activities and events in project work can make a unique contribution to connecting children with nature. As children do project work, they collect artifacts, study them closely, and represent what they learn by drawing, painting, constructing, writing, or even through play. Nature is highly stimulating and engaging, and invites study and deep thinking. In doing projects with nature, children form basic understanding of facts and terms… Just interacting with nature can provide challenges. As children focus their investigations on nature topics, they also learn that nature and a natural environment are interesting and valuable. They learn to be protective and supportive of the natural environment (p. 8 & 9).
During the course of this study there were many illustrations of ways in which the
children co-constructed knowledge. One example occurred during the nature hunt,
when children discussed ways to protect flora and fauna; another was during the
construction of the environment model when children learnt about camouflage and
threats to wildlife. Learning was facilitated by the teacher and teacher aide who
provided appropriate materials and resources and scaffolded learning through open-
ended questioning. Further, the children were involved in democratic group learning
such as building the environment model and creating the class book, and decided
what was to be included in the documentation of their environment project.
Additionally, the transformative Project Approach enabled the children to
demonstrate pro-environmental dispositions, express their learning and action taking
variously through their dialogue, play and artwork throughout the study. For
example, the children’s environment project was initially triggered by a child’s
collage and accompanying text …I am thinking about the rainforest… (Trina). This
artwork was then shared at grouptime and became the catalyst for the children’s
environment project by prompting discussion about what children wanted to learn.
In other words children’s play and artwork reflected their thoughts, ideas and
solutions to sustainability issues. This analysis is supported by Wright (2010) who
describes children as participating simultaneously inside and outside the creative
process. This means that children sometimes perceive themselves as subjects of
The final step in an action research cycle is to think of new actions arising from
the findings. Therefore, the implications of this study’s findings in relation to early
childhood education for sustainability are now considered. Two main implications
have been identified. First, that early childhood teachers consider the Project
Approach an effective method to assist young children to learn about environmental
issues; and second, current co-constructivist Project Approaches can be strengthened
with critical theoretical insights.
Regarding the first implication, this study has provided research evidence for the
use and effectiveness of the Project Approach as a means of assisting children to
learn about environmental and sustainability issues. Children in this study were
involved in decision-making and action-taking around sustainability issues in their
local contexts (at the kindergarten, local community and homes). The argument
made here is that education for sustainability in early childhood education should
begin in children’s local communities. During the study children explored issues
such as human impact on wildlife and were able to suggest ways to act to protect
wildlife. As Davis (2010) points out, children are exposed to “graphic images on
television of dying birds, drowning polar bears, choking smog and urban slums” (p.
29). This study provides evidence that contradicts those educators and
commentators who say that environmental and sustainability topics are too hard for
young children to grasp. For example, the Early Childhood Environmental
Education Programs: Guidelines for Excellence (North American Association for
Environmental Education, 2010) states that:
Young children do not have the coping skills to face the tragedies of environmental crises and problems. When faced with the loss of endangered species and environmental degradation, young children may respond with sadness, fear, and helplessness, which can lead to a defensive apathy (p. 4).
process as they investigated local and meaningful environmental sustainability issues
and they co-constructed knowledge and then created change related to various
environmental sustainability issues that arose during the children’s environment
project. Such experiences support the integration of transformative teaching
elements in the kindergarten year.
Chapter Summary
This chapter has presented the study’s findings and discussed the key themes that
arose from data analysis. In doing so, two of the study’s three research questions
have been discussed. These have contributed to developing insights into children’s
participation in sustainability, an area which requires greater understanding and
theorizing (Elliott & Davis, 2009). Three themes consistently ran through the data,
while often overlapping.
In summary, what was found is that children are able to identify and analyse
environmental situations, can propose and enact solutions to environmental issues,
act in sustainable ways and produce educational materials to inform others about
ways to act for the environment. This study challenges, and indeed contradicts,
suggestions by the North American Association for Environmental Education (2010)
that implies that young children will not fully understand the implications of their
current actions, nor grasp the concepts of limited natural resources or conservation.
This study, instead, serves as an example of successful early childhood education for
sustainability.
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 158 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
CHAPTER FIVE
Concluding the Study
Early childhood education for sustainability is an emergent field, with young
children’s potential to engage in, and to act upon, sustainability issues still largely
unexplored by research. This study, which examined the broadening of early
childhood practice by embedding education for sustainability within it, has made a
contribution to the field. It has done this by utilising a transformative Project
Approach with a group of twenty-two kindergarten children who explored
environmental sustainability issues.
This final chapter begins by summarising the previous chapters before moving on
to address the study’s third research question: What is the ‘learning journey’ of the
teacher-researcher when her co-constructivist teaching approaches are extended
towards transformative early education? Next, key findings, theoretical
advancements, recommendations and implications of the study are discussed.
Finally, the thesis is concluded.
Summary of Previous Chapters
In Chapter one, the research interest and research questions were introduced.
Essentially, the study stemmed from my own concern about the current state of the
Earth, a personal interest in sustainability issues and a desire to improve my
classroom practice by addressing these issues in meaningful ways with young
children. Chapter two reviewed the literature pertaining to early childhood education
for sustainability and established the need for further research in this field. Early
childhood education for sustainability was found to be an emergent field with little
research underpinning its advancement. In this chapter a conceptual framework for
the study was presented. In essence the conceptual framework brought together
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 159 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
insights drawn from the two fields of study interest, early childhood education and
education for sustainability. Co-constructivist insights, drawn from the field of early
childhood education, were synthesised with transformative insights drawn from the
field of education for sustainability. Chapter three outlined the study’s methodology
which was an action research case study aimed at improving classroom practice.
Chapter four detailed the study’s data collection and analysis processes. This
chapter detailed the seven week timeframe of the children’s environment project and
showed the richness of children’s ideas, play, actions and solutions related to
environmental sustainability. Children demonstrated a plethora of understandings
about sustainability issues in a variety of ways. Data were analysed in response to
two of the study’s three research questions in this chapter. In a second layer of
analysis key themes were identified.
Research Question 3. The Teacher-Researcher’s Journey
It was anticipated that ways to improve teaching and learning about education for
sustainability would be gained as a result of participation in this action research
(McNiff, Lomax & Whitehead, 2003). Therefore, the third research question was
posed for this study:
What is the ‘learning journey’ of the teacher-researcher when her co-constructivist
teaching approaches are extended towards transformative early education? My
response follows. My learning journey during this research has been twofold. I have
been both the subject and the agent of change (Stevenson, 2007).
Transforming My Teaching Philosophy and Practices
By engaging in this action research study I have been able to research and
theorise my teaching practices rather than continue conforming (Kemmis, 2009) to
practices which I felt were unable to address sustainability or embed education for
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 160 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
sustainability into the kindergarten curricula. This meant a paradigm shift (Kemmis,
2009) from my longheld co-constructivist practices to the integration of
transformative practices. This synthesis has resulted in revised curriculum planning
and teaching approaches. In other words, the focus on co-constructing knowledge
has broadened to include teaching and learning strategies that assist young children
to enact change based on the knowledge that they co-construct.
The critical reflection embedded into this action research case study also enabled
me to recognise that there were already some transformative elements in my
teaching, but the study helped me develop these further. For example, open ended
questioning strategies have broadened from encouraging children to co-construct
knowledge to encouraging children to consider possible actions based on knowledge
they have developed. Children were able to devise solutions and enact these as
demonstrated by their water conservation measures in the sand pit when they chose
only to use cup-sized containers rather than larger buckets.
The study also raised questions for me in terms of considering the educational
influence of the teacher, the role of intentional teaching, and how additional areas of
sustainability such as the economic, social and political dimensions, might be
addressed using a transformative Project Approach. The use of democratic practices,
for example, has been part of my teaching repertoire for many years. In this action
research study, democratic practices were implemented in the earliest stages of the
children’s environment project when they conducted the nature hunt which was then
incorporated into the program. Other examples include when children made a
collaborative list of topics of interest, and, when children proposed solutions to
environmental issues such as leaving insects in their natural habitats and not picking
leaves off the trees. The children freely articulated these thoughts with one another
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 161 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
and with the teachers during their nature hunt. As children shared these thoughts,
their peers could be observed also taking care not to pick leaves and flowers or to
catch insects. This helped me recognise that I had been using democratic approaches
for some time and that the children knew how to operate effectively in a democratic
environment. It was here that they were free to offer ideas and propose solutions.
Moreover, children’s democratic behaviours influenced peers within the
kindergarten context to behave in similar ways.
However, participation in the study resulted in greater awareness of my own
practices. While I recognise that transformative elements, such as democratic
processes, were already present prior to the study taking place, the study enabled my
further development of these as well as the inclusion of other transformative
elements such as empowerment, agency and enacting change. During the study,
emphasis was placed on ways to facilitate children to enable them to enact change
based on their suggestions and ideas, a key tenet of transformative education. For
example, rather than asking open-ended questions and sharing thoughts and ideas for
environmental solutions, we found ways to act on these. An example of this was
when the children compiled their ideas about ways to show that they cared for the
environment. This was enacted by publishing the class book to educate others. The
first step was the co-construction of knowledge about caring for the environment.
The second transformative step was to enact a change.
During the study, questions were designed to scaffold children’s learning and
thinking and also to encourage them to think about ways they could act or create
change. Harris Helm and Katz (2011) describe teachers who use the Project
Approach as supporting children’s curiosity rather than ‘crushing’ children’s natural
curiosity and disposition to learn. Inclusion of transformative strategies, however,
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 162 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
provided children with expanded opportunities to enact change based on their
interests, curiosity and learning. In other words, with encouragement, children were
able to develop ‘ways to act’ based on the knowledge they had co-constructed.
Latter stages of the study saw examples where children became more empowered,
exercised agency and enacted change in relation to several environmental issues.
This was evidenced when children influenced others including families and local
community to take up environmentally sustainable practices. An example of this
was when posters were made for a local bakery to remind bakers to recycle empty
packaging.
Participation in the study also caused me to consider the educative influence of
myself as the teacher on children, particularly in relation to the pedagogical approach
appropriate for facilitating education for sustainability. Jenkins (2009) advocates a
teacher-facilitator approach for effective education for sustainability. A teacher-
facilitator approach occurs when the teacher establishes the learning environment so
that it responds to children’s needs and interests by paying attention to materials and
interactions ensuring these are appropriate (MacNaughton & Williams, 2009). This
approach aligns with education for sustainability as it provides children with the
opportunities to examine possibilities for change. MacNaughton and Williams
(2009) describe teacher-facilitators as encouraging independent learning and self
discovery. The argument made in this study is that a teacher-facilitator approach is
necessary for a transformative Project Approach. Teachers should facilitate both co-
constructivist and transformative activities through questioning, discussing and
scaffolding. Questioning, for example, can encourage children to co-construct
knowledge but also to consider ways to act upon this knowledge.
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 163 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Initiating, leading and participating in this study has encouraged me to consider
the role of intentional teaching. For example, I surmised that the children’s interest
in environmental issues could easily be broadened to include learning about
Indigenous perspectives, particularly given the adjoining nature reserve’s Indigenous
heritage. However, an interest in Indigenous topics was not raised by children. This
could be attributed to the fact that none of the child participants had Indigenous
heritage. This then raises the question about the role of intentional teaching and
whether or not it would have been appropriate for me to influence the course of the
project by deliberately introducing Indigenous content. In the past I would have seen
that, by intentionally introducing Indigenous perspectives, I would have been
steering the children’s learning and would have been uncomfortable with this.
Intentional teaching is described in the EYLF document (Australian Government
DEEWR, 2009, p. 15) as an approach which sees educators move flexibly between
roles and utilising different strategies, fosters high level thinking skills, extends
children’s thinking and learning, is deliberate, purposeful and thoughtful. Therefore,
inclusion of Indigenous topics could have broadened the study to include the social
dimension of sustainability rather than focusing mainly on environmental
sustainability issues.
This has caused me to reflect further on my long-held views about building
curriculum around children’s demonstrated interests and to now consider future
inclusion of intentional teaching within the transformative Project Approach model.
By not introducing children to Indigenous culture, learning opportunities were lost. I
am not suggesting that I should have planned specific content or experiences that
could have potentially ‘steered’ the course of the children’s environment project. I
do, however, feel that the introduction of an appropriate Indigenous book or poster
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 164 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
may have ‘sparked’ the children’s interest. If this had occurred this interest could
have been explored in similar ways to the children’s other demonstrated interests.
By teaching intentionally, further dimensions of sustainability (political, social and
economic dimensions, Figure 1 in Chapter 2) can also become embedded parts of
early childhood curricula.
In summary, most significant for me was the realisation that involvement in this
study has been the catalyst for changes in my own teaching philosophy. This was
not immediately obvious upon the conclusion of the study. In hindsight, though, I
now see that use of a transformative lens has broadened my thinking, values and
practices as a teacher. I see this as an ongoing process. I began the study valuing,
but perhaps not fully practising, transformative practices. I conducted the study
practising and broadening transformative practices but now find these practices
embedded into my teaching and permeating the fabric of the kindergarten. I no
longer perceive my role as helping children to learn and co-construct knowledge
alone. I have re-conceptualised my role as one that encourages children to question
the status quo, to find new ways to solve problems, to be active participants and
contributors in their world.
Transforming Kindergarten Culture
It is now twenty months since the study was concluded. Distance from the study
has given me perspective and the realisation that the kindergarten is now operating
within a culture of sustainable change and transformative pedagogies similar to those
described by Davis et al. (2005). For example, staff, curriculum and management
committee decision-making and practices now reflect a heightened awareness of
sustainability issues and transformative practices. These include, decisions being
made with the specific intention of reducing the kindergarten’s carbon footprint (the
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 165 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
amount of carbon released into the atmosphere by the centre’s activities which
contributes to global warming) and making purchases of sustainable products such as
those made from materials that can be reproduced rather than from materials that are
finite. The following diagram (Figure 26) summarises the kindergarten practices that
were already in place prior to the study (blue circles) and those that occurred during,
and as a consequence of, the children’s environment project (green circles) and
represents a comparison with Figure 11, presented earlier. Figure 11 showed
sustainable practices in place prior to the study taking place.
This transformed culture and my learning journey as teacher and director are
interwoven. When the study began, I was already implementing a variety of
teaching practices that were also transformative such as democratic decision-making.
However, as the children responded to even more democratic approaches, I found we
were encouraged to continue to explore and implement further transformative
practices and that the children continued to be engaged. Davis (2010) describes:
A ‘culture of sustainability’ as the outcome hoped for when an early childhood centre brings sustainability thinking and practices into all aspects of its teaching, operation environment and relationships. This is where sustainability practices and habits, such as careful use of water and energy and democratic decision-making processes between all those involved in the centre- become part of every-day learning, routines and relationships (p.5).
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 166 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Figure 26. Environmentally sustainable kindergarten practices before and after the study
Indicates pre-cursors to the study
Indicates environmentally sustainable practices that came about during the study
Children’s
further water
conservation practices
Class book – ways to act
for the environment
Re- cycling
posters for shops
Environment
-ally friendly cleaning practices
Water tank and sensor
taps – water conservation
Compost
-ing Planting policy in line with Reserve
Litter-less
lunches
Kinder- garten’s
environment
policy
Large, natural
playground
Kinder- garten’s location
The environment
model
Possum box
Further recycling practices introduced
Sustain-able
practices
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 167 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
The process, then, was a mutually-reinforcing cycle of transformation between
children and teachers. Not only does the cycle continue, it also ‘radiates’ out to
influence and change practices of those more widely associated with the
kindergarten such as the management committee. These relationships are illustrated
by the following diagram (Figure 27) which shows teachers and the children in the
centre engaged in the kindergarten’s new transformative curriculum, with radiating
arrows pointing to examples of how embedding education for sustainability into the
kindergarten curriculum has influenced wider areas of decision-making and practices
within the kindergarten and with those agencies and people associated with the
kindergarten.
Figure 27. The influence of the kindergarten’s culture of change
Staff and
children
engaged in transformative
education
Management
committee
decisions reflect sustainability principles
Other outside
agencies, for example: recycling posters made by children for shops
Kindergarten
purchasing
practices
Example: recycled materials
Grant
applications for sustainable infrastructure. Example: solar panels
Longterm
kindergarten plans influenced by sustainability Example: mural on external walls to reflect realistic pictures of local flora and fauna
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 168 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
The following list further outlines short and long term plans made by the teaching
staff and management committees since the children’s environment project in 2010:
2011 Successful solar grant application and the installation of solar panels to
lessen reliance on fossil fuels.
2011 New purchases of children’s equipment made from recycled materials
including recycling trucks, animal sets and bamboo construction set to
provide resources that reinforce recycling practices with children.
2011 Implementation of electronic communication for newsletters, fee
accounts and receipts to reduce paper consumption.
2012 Re-painting of external kindergarten building from a stylised sea mural
to one reflecting flora and fauna found in the neighbouring reserve. This
project will be designed in consultation with the local community group
that cares for the reserve, aimed at heightening awareness of, and
respect, for the natural environment.
2012 Implementing many of the children’s ideas within the playground
including a dry creek bed feature and native planting.
Key Findings
This study found that young children are interested in, and concerned about,
environmental sustainability issues. They expressed this interest and concerns
during their regular participation in the kindergarten program, and these were
recorded during data collection process. Strife (2012) states that “voicing the
environmental concerns of children … may encourage broader public support for
policies designed to overcome the future environmental challenges that children will
face” (p.39). This means that, by responding to children’s interests and concerns
about environmental sustainability through embedded curricula, families and
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 169 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
community may also take up sustainable practices. Intergenerational influence is a
potentially powerful means to engage others towards sustainability (Ballantyne,
Connell & Fien, 2006). This study showed that children influenced their families
and local community when shopping practices were changed and recycling posters
were made. A further example of this potential influence was when the children cast
themselves as educators through the creation of their class book that had the specific
aim of educating others.
It was also found that the Project Approach supported children towards more
completely understanding complex issues through knowledge co-construction. The
children came to the understanding that water is a finite resource and illustrated this
understanding when they implemented water conservation measures into their daily
routines and water play. Such understandings were also illustrated when children
introduced further recycling practices at the kindergarten. These examples show that
addressing complex sustainability issues in early childhood education is within the
scope of understanding of young children.
Another finding was that, when transformative approaches were utilised, children
were able to act as change agents for the environment. In this study children were
supported and encouraged towards problem-seeking, problem-solving and action-
taking within their environment. This is described by Davis (2010) as transformative
education. This study involved children participating in a democratic environment
and creating change. Children acted as change agents in their: water use; recycling
measures; creation and distribution of recycling posters to local shops; waste
reduction; pollution control; influence on family shopping practices; ways to treat
flora and fauna; provision of animal housing within the playground (possum box);
and, creation of educational resources.
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 170 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
The final key finding was that the kindergarten’s involvement in the study
continues to influence decision-making and practices towards sustainability. Davis
and Pratt (2005) describe deep level cultural change within organisations, in this case
towards sustainability, as an evolutionary process which advances incrementally and
intermittently. These authors go on to describe characteristics of such change, as
starting with a moral purpose and characterised by a collaborative learning culture.
Although this study began with the interest of one of the kindergarten teachers, the
study became the catalyst for change within the kindergarten overall. Providing
impetus for these changes has been the ongoing interest and participation of the
children including those enrolled at the kindergarten since the study took place.
Theoretical Advancements
This section revisits the study’s conceptual framework introduced in Chapter two
and revisited here. As stated earlier, this was designed to provide a ‘lens’ through
which to view this research, representing my existing beliefs and teaching practices.
Figure 5. Conceptual framework – Young Children as Change Agents for
Sustainability
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 171 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
This conceptual framework had value at the start of the study as it provided a
‘roadmap’ for me as a beginning researcher. Essentially it provided me with a
starting point and enabled me to keep key teaching strategies for early childhood
education for sustainability at the forefront of my thinking, planning and teaching.
In particular it helped me consider ways to broaden the suite of co-constructivist
practices so that children could act on the knowledge they co-constructed in order to
bring about change.
Right up to the present, most practitioners in early childhood education champion
socio-constructivist approaches (Hazard, 2011). This study’s investigation into
education for sustainability, however, has provided a new way of theorising early
childhood education. The study has advanced early childhood education theory by
successfully synthesising two theoretical perspectives. This study responded to calls
by Davis (2010), Pramling Samuelsson and Kaga (2008) and Robinson and Vaealiki
(2010) to broaden early childhood educational approaches to include education for
sustainability and transformative practices rather than to continue with teaching and
learning approaches that focus on learning in and about the environment.
As established in Chapter two, environmental education alone fails to contribute
to developing sustainable practices or creating agents of change for sustainability
(Davis, 2010). This study has provided evidence that longheld early childhood
traditions of environmental and nature education can be extended so that young
children continue to learn in and about the environment, but also for the environment
by participating in transformative education approaches.
Transformative Project Approach in Early Childhood Education Contexts
In essence, this study provides a new way of viewing the Project Approach. The
Project Approach has been re-conceptualised and reinvigorated in order to address
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 172 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
the contemporary complexities posed by sustainability issues. Thus, this new model
(Figure 25) revisited here, advances early childhood education theory by identifying
and including essential elements necessary for transformative early education and
successful early childhood education for sustainability. The colour scheme used in
the model correlates with the study’s conceptual framework. For example, insights
drawn from co-constructivist early childhood education are represented in the blue
section (left side), and insights drawn from transformative education for
sustainability are represented in the green section (right side). The grey section
(surrounding central oval) represents the essential teacher-facilitator role necessary
to facilitate a transformative Project Approach. This model is a practical tool that
can be utilised by early childhood teachers to help inform and guide teaching
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 173 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Children as Change Agents
In this study it was found that using a transformative Project Approach
encouraged children to be agents of change for sustainability. This study challenged
traditional views of children and supported notions of children as competent, capable
and able to enact change. Developmentalist views of children position them as
needing to be cared for rather than being able to care (Robinson & Vaealiki, 2010).
Contradicting this view, this study provided examples of children caring about
environmental sustainability and enacting changes based on their care. Davis (2011)
describes child participation and agency as central to early childhood education for
sustainability and based on children’s rights. As Robinson and Vaealiki (2010) state,
“Early childhood education for sustainability promotes the view that children have a
voice that provides them with opportunities to influence their world” (p.162).
As already reported, children were the catalysts for sustainable change in a variety
of ways. They did influence their families and the community. This
intergenerational influence is described by Ballantyne, Connell and Fien (2006) as a
potentially powerful means to engage others, already perhaps with established
patterns of unsustainable practices, towards sustainability.
The children involved in this study provided a legacy for future kindergarten
classes. New kindergarten classes in the centre now begin their learning at a
different starting point from the children who participated in the 2010 project. To
explain, the kindergarten now has embedded education for sustainability. For
example, the possum box, instigated by the child participants in this study, is an
established fixture and point of learning for kindergarten children now and into the
future. Practices, such as recycling yoghurt containers and conserving water in sand-
play, are now embedded and natural parts of every day.
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 174 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Practical Advancement: Teacher Roles in Early Childhood Education for
Sustainability
This study contributes to teacher practice by providing examples of ‘how to do
education for sustainability’ with young children by providing a case study which
used the Project Approach, an approach familiar to early childhood educators. It
spells out how the project developed, describes the various learning experiences that
occurred, and the teaching strategies that were employed. Although the study was
not designed with curricular replication in mind, early childhood teachers who might
be hesitant or unsure about how to include education for sustainability into their
early childhood programs could take ideas from this study and utilise these in their
own curriculum planning and pedagogical practice.
Recommendations of the Study
Engaging in this study leads me to make the following recommendations for both
education for sustainability and early childhood education.
Education for Sustainability in Early Childhood
It is recommended, in this study, that education for sustainability should begin in
early childhood education. This recommendation is supported by Davis (2010,
2011), Pramling Samuelsson and Kaga (2008), and Robinson and Vaealiki (2010).
However, as early childhood education for sustainability becomes more mainstream,
it remains under-researched and under-theorised (Davis, 2011). This study supports
the recommendation through its contributions to both research and theory on which,
it is argued, early childhood education for sustainability can develop. In terms of
research, the study has shown that young children can actively engage in, and enact
change, with issues relating to them (Davis, 2011). In terms of theory, the study has
shown that transformative education practices that align with education for
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 175 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
sustainability can be integrated into early childhood education. Furthermore, the
transformative Project Approach model was provided as a means to achieve this.
Early Childhood Education should embrace Education for Sustainability
Belonging, Being and Becoming. The Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF,
2009) is the Australian national curriculum for early childhood education in
Australia, forming part of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) reform
agenda (Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and
Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments, 2009). However, it
is virtually silent about education for sustainability. As a final research activity for
this study, I recently conducted a word search of this document to gain a sense of
how or whether education for sustainability was positioned in this document. The
word search revealed that environmental education is noted once, education for
sustainability is not used at all; construction is mentioned once, transformative
education is not mentioned at all; critical reflection is mentioned but only in relation
to teachers; and, action is mentioned 17 times but not in relation to environmental
education. The slow response by early childhood education to make the shift from
environmental education to education for sustainability, as discussed in Chapter 2, is
reflected by the document’s use of these terms. For example, Belonging, Being and
Becoming. The Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF, 2009) uses the term
environmental education rather than education for sustainability.
A second document of importance to Queensland C&K kindergartens is the
curriculum Building Waterfalls (C&K, 2011). As the kindergarten in this study is
affiliated with C&K it is required to work within C&K’s guidelines. Building
Waterfalls has four currents of thought which are: connecting, enlarging, listening
and exploring. Within the ‘connecting’ current of thought there are three shared
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 176 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
understandings. One of these is ‘we are connected to a sustainable world’. This is
explained as occurring when children and teachers: respect the planet; investigate
and promote the possibilities and properties of the environment; and communicate a
commitment to a sustainable future (C&K, 2011, p.16). The associated learning
statement specifies that children will “discover, connect with and act responsibly in
the natural and built environment” (C&K, 2011, p.16). Although the term ‘act’ is
used, it relates more to doing the right thing rather than embedding notions of
participation in enacting environmental change. For example the learning statement
could read children are encouraged towards discovery, connection, participation
and action for the natural and built environments in ways that contribute to a
sustainable future. This revised learning statement fits more within a transformative
educational approach and, therefore, aligns better with education for sustainability.
A third document, A Guide to the National Quality Standard (Australian
Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority, 2011), recognizes that early
childhood services can contribute towards embedding sustainability into practices
and educational programmes. This regulatory document requires early childhood
services to comply with Standard 3.3 (p. 83) which involves services taking an active
role in embedding sustainable practices and children being supported towards
becoming environmentally responsible and showing respect for the environment.
Looking at these three documents highlights two important points. First, that
education for sustainability is not yet embedded within early childhood curricula,
and, second, early childhood curricula cannot be characterised as transformative
education. Based on the evidence provided by this study, it is recommended that
early childhood educators engage more fully with transformative education
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 177 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
approaches in order to embed education for sustainability into early childhood
education.
Future Research
Future research possibilities are now identified. First, longitudinal studies could
be conducted on the later life stages of children who experience education for
sustainability in early childhood settings to find whether early experiences continue
to influence them. Second, further research into early childhood education where
transformative teaching and learning approaches are central to curriculum to explore
children’s practices and influences on communities. Third, research could be
conducted that follows young children into primary school settings where
transformative education practices are employed to gain insight into how and
whether children continue to enact change as they grow older.
First, longitudinal studies into the impact of early childhood education for
sustainability on later life-stages are required, to explore long-term outcomes of
starting early with education for sustainability. For example, researchers could
identify whether or not young children (who experience education for sustainability
within their early childhood education experiences) are influenced towards
sustainable practices in later everyday life.
Second, future research into early childhood education where transformative
teaching and learning approaches are the central focus, could explore evidence of
children’s pro-environmental attitudes, practices, actions and the impact these have
on communities. As identified by this study, young children influenced and
educated their families and communities about education for sustainability based on
their own learning, decision-making and action-taking.
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 178 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Third, further research into the long-term influences of a transformative project
teaching approach beyond kindergarten would make an interesting extension.
Young children involved in early childhood education for sustainability at
kindergarten could be the focus of research that follows them into primary school
where transformative education practices are also employed. Research into
transformative teaching and learning approaches could contribute further insight into
how young children are able to continue enacting change and participating in
transformative ways as they get older. Littledyke and McCrea (2009) state that:
Often another challenge is the tension between early childhood education practices and those adopted by the primary school. The process orientation and play-based nature of early childhood education and the more content-oriented practice of primary education can result in a sense of dislocation for young children as they begin primary school (p.51).
This study gives insight into young children’s participation, ideas and thoughts
about sustainability and highlights the need for future research that is similarly
“cognisant of children’s rights to have a voice and share their perspectives about
early childhood education for sustainability” (Mackey & Vaealiki, 2011).
Implications for Researchers Working with Young Children
This study also highlights implications for other researchers, especially those
working with a classroom of young children. As a researcher, I faced a number of
issues and dilemmas related to dealing with large groups of children. In particular, it
was not always possible to note what an individual child had to say during group
time when several children speak simultaneously and often suggest similar ideas.
Upon reflection, I attributed this dilemma to the co-constructed learning environment
designed to support children learning from one another and taking up or extending
the ideas expressed by their peers. During the process of obtaining ethical clearance,
however, I was required to nominate a specified number of children who would be
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 179 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
engaged in the study. This was difficult due to the group learning and shared
experiences that typically occurred throughout the data collection process.
My dilemma was that, by not including the contributions of some children, I
would have been denying them the right to participate in research to which they had
consented. MacNaughton and Hughes (2009, p.91) raise the question about ‘who
has the right to refuse children’s involvement in research?’ In the instance of this
study, consent to participate was gained from all children and their parents. For me
this raised the issue of my rights to include or exclude children’s contributions when
they had consented to participate. An implication, therefore, could be the re-
examination of the ethical clearance processes in relation to specifying the number of
children who will participate. This requirement did not suit the unpredictable nature
of working with young children in groups.
By its very nature action research is open-ended and often follows an ‘emergent’
path (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009). The researcher is involved in the action
research cycle and the study’s outcomes emerge with each step, giving the study
unclear direction (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009). This was the case in this study.
This unclear and emergent research approach requires an ethics process which caters
for it.
Conclusion
This thesis examined education for sustainability in an early childhood setting and
has shown that young children are capable of co-constructing knowledge and
learning about environmental sustainability as well as enacting environmentally
sustainable change in their kindergarten, family and wider community contexts. It
responds to the calls by Davis (2010) for early childhood education to ‘fully engage’
with education for sustainability, by conducting research into early childhood
Chapter 5: Concluding the Study 180 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
education for sustainability and developing teaching and learning approaches that
support its authentic inclusion. This thesis provides a case study which explores
early childhood education for sustainability, a topic not common in the field of early
childhood education according to Pramling Samuelsson and Kaga (2008). These
authors also advise that education for sustainability can be addressed by broadening
established early childhood pedagogies rather than discarding them. Robinson and
Vaealiki (2010) also recommend that current early childhood education approaches
be examined to determine if they can enable children to participate in education for
sustainability. This study has responded to these recommendations by building upon
an established early childhood approach, the Project Approach, and including
transformative insights drawn from the field of education for sustainability.
To summarise, findings from this study imply that predominantly co-
constructivist early childhood education can be enhanced by integrating
transformative teaching approaches to facilitate early childhood education for
sustainability. This synthesis provides educators and young children with a platform
to learn in, about and for environmental sustainability. In other words, young
children can be supported to co-construct knowledge about environmental
sustainability but can also act on this knowledge.
The study continues to influence me as the teacher-researcher. My involvement
in this study has developed my reflective practice and raised additional questions
about how my transformative Project Approach can be further developed to include
aspects of education for sustainability beyond the environmental focus. Further, a
culture of change continues within the kindergarten. The children’s environment
project has been the catalyst for deep changes in thinking, practices and ongoing
emphasis on sustainability issues at the kindergarten.
References 181 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
REFERENCES
Anfara, V. A., Brown, K. M., & Mangione, T. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on
stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7),
28-38.
Angrosino, M. V. (2008). Recontextualizing observation: Ethnography, pedagogy,
and the prospects for a progressive political agenda. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S.
Lincoln, (Eds.), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials (pp. 161-
183). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Ardzejewska, K., & Coutts, P. M. (2004). Teachers who support Reggio –
exploring understandings of the philosophy. Australian Journal of Early
Childhood, 29(4), 17-23.
Arseneau, R., & Rodenburg, D. (1998). The developmental perspective:
Cultivating ways of thinking. In D. D. Pratt, (Ed.), Five Perspectives on
Teaching in Adult and Higher Education (pp. 105- ). Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Death, E., Dockett, S., & Farmer, S. (2008). Programming
and planning in early childhood settings. 4th ed. Australia: Nelson.
Atherton, J. S. (2005). Constructivist Theory. Learning and teaching:
Constructivism in learning. Retrieved October 20, 2006, from
Wilson, R. (2008). Nature and young children. New York: Routledge.
Wood, E. (2004). Developing a pedagogy of play. Early Childhood Education.
Society and Culture. Angela Anning, Joy Cullen & Marilyn Fleer (editors).
London: SAGE.
Wright, S. (2010). Understanding Creativity in Early Childhood: Meaning-making
and children’s drawings. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Young, T. (2007). Why do young children need to know about climate change?
Voice, 3(3), 3.
Appendices 208 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
APPENDICES
A Guidelines for Consulting with Young Children
B Building Waterfalls: Shared understandings
C Early Childhood Australia’s Code of Ethics related to research
D Teacher-researcher’s conference participation
E Roger Hart’s Ladder of Young People’s Participation
F Teacher-researcher’s ethics statement
G Letter of permission for parents of participants and child consent
H Kindergarten handbook excerpt
I August 20120 ewsletter and letter to families
J Documentation of the children’s project
K Class book publication
Appendices 209 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix A
Guidelines for Consulting with Young Children
Early Childhood Australia believes that:
1. Children must be consulted.
The process by which they are consulted must reflect commitment to maintain the dignity and welfare of children and their
families. All those consulting with children must adhere to the accepted guidelines of professional and ethical practice.
Professional and ethical practice includes consideration of each situation with reference to context, time, environment,
acknowledgment of key players and their values, legal aspects, professional principles and ethical principles.
2. Children's views must be valued and treated with respect.
Due consideration must always be given in any situation where a child expresses themselves. In the process of consultation and
consequent representation these views and a child's perspective is to be valued.
3. The privacy of all children must be respected at all times.
Information collected in the process of consultation must not be used inappropriately. While confidentiality can never be
absolute, information must be treated in a professional, legal and ethical way.
4. Best practice is crucial.
When interacting with young children is based on sound knowledge, research and theories in early childhood.
5. Any adults interacting with children in a professional or personal role should adhere to principles that
reflect respect for children's rights.
Policy principles
• The underlying principles related to this policy reflect adherence and commitment to the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Early Childhood Australia Code of Ethics.
• Children are active in constructing their understanding of their world.
• Children’s autonomy and initiative must be respected.
• Children must be empowered to express their views and to expect that their views will be taken into
account.
Appendices 210 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
• It is essential that young children are consulted in matter that affect them. This consultation may be
specific to individual situations or may involve representative group to inform more general practices.
• From birth a child is capable of expressing views and is able to make them known, especially to those
attuned to interacting with young children.
• At times young children are not able to speak for themselves in forums/situations which may have an
impact on their future experiences. In these situations groups and individuals who represent young children must
have the opportunity to speak for them. In order to be a voice for children, advocates must consult with children
and their families.
• Every effort must be made to ensure that it is the voice of young children that is heard. Adults must
acknowledge the children's perspective in any representation they make on their behalf. The opinions of young
children and representation of their experiences must be sought out. When interpreted or presented to others this
information should maintain the truth as viewed by the children consulted. A child's opinion must be valued for its
validity to their perspective.
• Advocates for children must be authentic representatives who value and honor individuality and diversity.
Any interpretation of data gathered from consultation with children must be done based on a sound understanding
of contemporary Early Childhood theory.
• Consent must be obtained from children and their families in order to include them in any process of data
gathering. The purpose of the consultation must be made clear to the children and their families. Children are to
have any process they are involved in explained to them at a level, which they can understand.
• Children must not be placed in any situation or environment that presents a threat to their health or
wellbeing. In consulting with children adults must consider the children's health and wellbeing at all times.
• Children must not be intimidated or interrogated in any way and they must be given sufficient time to
respond.
• No form of deception should be involved in consulting with children. Children must be respected. Adults
must be honest at all times when consulting with children.
• Parents, family members, early childhood professionals, researchers and advocacy groups can be
advocates for children. They must consult children and their families to be effective advocates. They have the
responsibility of making decisions and acting in ways that promote and protect the rights of young children. (Rodd,
1998)
Implementation strategies
• The specialist early childhood knowledge or expertise of any adult who provides support during any
consultation with children needs to be assessed. The context and needs of a child will influence this assessment.
For example, knowledge of pediatric health may be important in one situation. In another situation a good
understanding of cognitive and social development of young children may be essential.
Appendices 211 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
• Someone with specialist early childhood knowledge acting as an advocate for the child should always be
present when consultations are being conducted with children if their family members cannot be present.
• When consulting with children individual family culture must be considered.
• Questions addressed to children must be age/stage appropriate in style, content, complexity and length.
• When questioning children, it is important that those involved have an understanding of how children
recall information.
• Consideration must be given to how much questioning needs to occur to obtain relevant information.
• Environments in which any consultation takes place must be assessed as being appropriate and
authentic for the children and families involved.
• Children need to be provided with sufficient appropriate information to express a meaningful opinion.
• Individualised planned communication of the purpose of any consultation must be developed to meet the
needs of a child in any particular situation.
• Support structures are put in place to ensure consulting with young children is inclusive of all children,
e.g. children with a language other than English; children with disabilities.
• Special consideration needs to be given to consulting with very young children, e.g. infants.
Background Material
Early Childhood Australia Code of Ethics
Greenwood A (1993). Children’s rights: the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child. AECA Resource
Book Series. Australian Early Childhood Association: Canberra
HREOC & UNICEF. A guide through the Convention.
Nyland B. (1999). The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Using a concept of rights as a basis
for practice. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 24(1), 914.
Rodd J. (1998). Leadership in Early Childhood. Second edition. Allen & Unwin: St Leonards, NSW
Schiller W (1989). “A Fair Go” for children: An early childhood perspective on the Convention on the Rights of the
Child. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 14(20), 1520.
Wiersma W (1995). Research methods on education: An introduction. Sixth edition. Allyn & Bacon: Needham
Heights, Massachusetts.
Appendices 212 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix B
Building Waterfalls (2011) – C&K’s governing curriculum document for all C&K
kindergartens
Shared Understandings (The four ‘currents of thought’)
Connecting
• We are connected to family and community and country
• We connect with and build upon what we know
• We are connected to natural and sustainable world
Enlarging
• We are valued and treated with equity, dignity and respect
• We feel safe, nurtured and cared for
• We share satisfying interactions and relationships
Listening
• We are open and sensitive to new possibilities and perspectives
• We express, share and honour values, beliefs and traditions
• We contribute to a democratic learning environment
Exploring
• We are unique, rich in ideas, experiences and knowledge
• We are competent and capable learners, thinkers and inquirers
• We create, represent and communicate our understanding in many ways
(C and K, 2011, p.11)
Appendices 213 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix C
Statement about ethical conduct pertaining to research by early childhood educators,
as specified by Early Childhood Australia’s Code of Ethics:
1. Recognise that research includes my routine documentation and
investigations of children’s learning and development, as well as more formal
research projects undertaken with and by external bodies.
2. Be responsive to children’s participation in research, negotiating their
involvement taking account of matters such as safety, fatigue, privacy and their
interest.
3. Support research to strengthen and expand the knowledge base of early
childhood, and where possible, initiate, contribute to, facilitate and disseminate such
research.
4. Make every effort to understand the purpose and value of proposed research
projects and make informed decisions as to the participation of myself, colleagues,
children, families and communities.
5. Ensure research in which I am involved meets standard ethical procedures
including informed consent, opportunity to withdraw and confidentiality.
6. Ensure that images of children and other data are only collected with
informed consent and are stored and utilised according to legislative and policy
requirements.
7. Represent the findings of all research accurately.
(Early Childhood Australia’s Code of Ethics, 2006, p.4)
Appendices 214 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix D
1) Participation in C&K Annual Conference (2008), excerpt from Conference
program:
2) Participation in C&K Annual Conference (2011), excerpt from Conference
program:
Living in a child’s world C&K Conference Brisbane 2011
21 - 22 May 2011, Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre
Sharon Stuhmcke Are young children aware of environmental sustainability issues? This session will focus on the experiences, thoughts, ideas and concerns children from a Brisbane kindergarten expressed during their participation in an environmental project. The session includes a power-point and visuals which support early childhood education for sustainability as a topical and appropriate child-interest. The data also serves to reflect the need to employ teaching and learning approaches that match the contemporary sustainability agenda.
Appendices 215 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix E
Appendices 216 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix F
Parent Information Letter for QUT Research Project
Young Children as Change Agents for Environmental Sustainability:
An Action Research Case Study in a Kindergarten
Research Team Contacts
Principal Supervisor –
Dr Julie M. Davis Senior Lecturer, School of Early Childhood
• have read and understood the information document regarding this project
• have had any questions answered to your satisfaction
• understand that if you have any additional questions you can contact the research team
• understand that you are free to withdraw at any time, without comment or penalty
• understand that you can contact the Research Ethics Unit on +61 7 3138 5123 or email
[email protected] if you have concerns about the ethical conduct of the project
• for projects involving minors: have discussed the project with your child and their
requirements if participating
• understand that the project will include observations, photographs, documentation of
project work and hand-written records of child conversation that occurs as the natural
part of the normal kindergarten program
• agree to participate in the project
Name
Signature
Date / /
Statement of Child Consent
Your parent or guardian has given their permission for you to be involved in
this research project.
This form is to seek your agreement to be involved.
By marking the ‘smiling face’ below, you are indicating that the project has been discussed with
you and you agree to participate in the project. By marking the ‘non-smiling face’ below, you
are indicating that you do not wish to participate.
Appendices 219 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Media Release Promotions
From time to time, we may like to promote our research to the general public
through, for example, newspaper articles. Would you be willing to be contacted by
QUT Media and Communications for possible inclusion in such stories? By ticking
this box, it only means you are choosing to be contacted – you can still decide at the
time not to be involved in any promotions.
Yes, you may contact me about inclusion in promotions
No, I do not wish to be contacted about inclusion in promotions
Please return this sheet to the investigator.
Appendices 220 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix H
Kindergarten handbook excerpt p.43
Environment
This Centre actively promotes education for the environment. We recognise that learning about the environment begins in early childhood. Where possible, staff model sustainable practices. Children are also encouraged to participate in learning about and engage in, sustainable practices as the state of the environment will indeed impact on their lives as well as those of future generations. Children are encouraged to participate in caring for and learning about the various plants, trees and creatures found in the playground. Children are encouraged to be ‘water-conscious’ in their play, to recycle where appropriate and to bring ‘litter free’ lunches. To promote this learning, children’s equipment includes materials such as - watering cans, magnifying glasses, books and posters about the environment. This Centre regularly includes articles and features about sustainability and environmental education in our monthly newsletters and parent information material.
Appendices 221 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix I
Letter to parents about the playground project
Dear Families,
This term we would like to start work on some environmental projects at the Kindy.
We are looking for some volunteers to oversee our vegie patch and also the
composting.
The children have also expressed interest in having a possum box placed in the
playground.
The other major outdoor project we would like to begin in re-vamping our
playground area. As a staff we have been talking about various ideas and
possibilities including a sensory pathway. Other ideas have included a ‘ball-run’, a
‘wobbly’ bridge with under-planting, garden statues to represent the native animals
found in our local area.
We are looking for other inspiring ideas, we are putting up an ‘IDEAS BOARD’ for
you to add your thoughts and/or photos of the different possibilities we could
investigate. Of course we want the children to contribute, they could draw or you
could write down their words about what they might like.
We are keen to utilise natural materials so that we can use this project to heighten
the children’s awareness of environmental topics and issues.
(name removed for confidentiality purposes) is a landscape architect and has offered
to help us put our ideas together in a plan!
Appendices 222 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Excerpt from August Newsletter, 2010
August Newsletter
Curriculum
We have started out this week reading ‘We’re going on a nature hunt’, this was
prompted by interest in Trina’s rainforest collage. The children are following this
interest by conducting their own nature hunts in the playground. They have
decided to use magnifying glasses and to take photographs rather than to pick the
leaves off the bushes or to collect the insects they find. Some interesting
discussions are occurring about how we can care for our environment.
The Kindy playground
This interest in the natural elements in our playground has been timely! We are
currently encouraging everyone to contribute to our IDEAS BOARD – we’d love to
see your ideas too!
The children have been drawing and collaging some of their ideas which include
bridges, water and lots of birds. Their work has been added to our Ideas Board. If
your child mentions anything about our playground ideas while at home please be
sure to add these as well.
Appendices 223 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix J
Documentation of the ‘children’s environment project’
The rainforest project by the Blue Group
Our interest in rainforests developed after Trina made an interesting ‘rainforest’
collage and asked Mrs S to write “I am thinking about the rainforest” on her work.
We decided we all wanted to think about the rainforest...
We began exploring this interest by reading ‘We’re going on a nature hunt’.
We noticed that the children in the story didn’t touch the animals or plants.
Then we decided that we wanted to go on our own nature hunt in the playground...
so we did... when we went on our ‘nature hunt’ we decided to collect some natural
items but someone said ‘…you can’t take living things off the trees or put the bugs in
containers because then they all die…’ We decided only to pick up leaves, bark and
stones that were already on the ground. We used these natural items in our play and
for craft.
We also added natural objects to the classroom like shells.
To help us notice the details of various environments Mrs S organised a spotlight
game on the Smart-board. We could only see a small piece of different
environments. This helped us to predict what king of environment the picture might
be. We then played this game with old calendar pictures and we used magnifying
glasses outside. These activities also helped us notice small details. We found that
grass is not all the same green and that bark on trees is not just the same brown.
The teachers added books with an environmental focus to the book corner and
posters around the room.
We made a list about what we wanted to learn...
Week 2
It is book week this week. We decided to look at Jeannie Baker’s books because
they have lots of environment pictures in them.
We also decided to start making a waterfall and rainforest environment - this was on
our list from last week.
Appendices 224 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
We covered the back board with yellow and green spray painting that we had kept
from last week. Then we started by using different sized boxes to create the
waterfall shape. We covered the boxes with white paper and then chose colours to
paint. We looked at rainforest pictures to help us decide about colours.
Mackenzie firstly wanted blue, then she went to check the waterfall photo and came
back saying ‘…we need yellow for the sun’s reflection and we need white for the
bubbly bits...’
Then it was decided that the water coming down the waterfall needed a lake at the
bottom, so that was made next.
The following day we kept working...
The children decided they needed mountains on either side of the waterfall so they
set about looking at mountain pictures then drawing the mountain shapes onto the
yellow/green backdrop.
Then they painted the mountains.
Week 3
This week we focused on stories about protecting the environment, conserving water
and recycling.
We made some decisions including using only small containers to get water for
sand-play because we don’t want to waste water.
We also learnt about recycling by playing ‘The Earth’ game on the starfall website.
This taught us about the recycling symbol and recycling bins. We learnt that
recycling means things are used again and less rubbish goes into landfill. We
already have ‘litter-less lunches’ but we decided to recycle our yoghurt containers
and use them as paint-pots so they weren’t going in the rubbish.
Week 4
We read a special story called ‘Lester and Clyde’ today - it taught us about how
important clean environments are for animals.
Appendices 225 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
One of the posters showing documentation of the ‘children’s environment project’
Week 5
The children continued to add to their rainforest and waterfall environment. Rocks
were collected from outside and added to the environment. The children made trees
and burrows. Some burrows were made near the pond, these were for the
platypuses. Some burrows were made at the foot of the mountain. These were for
the echidnas and wombats. The children moved the trees around and discussed the
need for the animals to be able to ‘camouflage’ in order to stay safe. W suggested
that we needed a ‘rainforest canopy’ too. We made threadings to hang down. We
added green and yellow paper “so we couldn’t see the sun” and we added cellophane
to the windows to help create the ‘rainforest’ effect.
We also learnt about the life-cycle of the butterfly because we knew that butterflies
can be found in the rainforest.
As a ‘synthesising’ activity (bringing our learning together) we enjoyed a ‘rainforest’
puppet show. This show had strong environmental and conservation messages.
Appendices 226 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Week 6
Although we still have our ‘rainforest and waterfall’ environment in the classroom
we decided to conclude this project by making a booklet that would remind us about
our decisions about caring for the environment.
To make this book we reflected on our project by looking at the photos, revisiting
our rainforest model, exploring the books we had used and by lots of class
discussions and by making lists about what we think is important.
We know by acting in ways that protect our environment we are helping the
Earth.
Appendices 227 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Appendix K
Class book publication
What we do for our environment (Title)
By the Blue Group
Page 1
We look after animals.
We make places for animals to live.
You can put possum boxes in the trees.
We don’t scare animals and we are quiet.
Page 2
We don’t cut down our trees because we don’t want animals to die and trees give us
oxygen. People and animals need oxygen.
We don’t cut down trees because the birds have nests there and their food is in the
trees too.
We let our trees grow high.
Page 3
We don’t let pets kill the animals.
We keep pet birds in cages but we don’t put catbirds and scrub turkeys in cages.
Appendices 228 Sharon Stuhmcke EdD Thesis 2012
Page 4
We can teach people “no more throwing rubbish on the world” and “roll up paper so
it doesn’t get wasted”, like in ‘Michael Recycle’.
Page 5
We put our rubbish in the bins.
We don’t bring rubbish in our lunch box.
Page 6
We keep the playground clean so the animals don’t eat rubbish and die... and we
don’t leave broken glass because the animals might get hurt.
The animals come back when there is no rubbish... that’s why we put rubbish in the
buckets with the ‘right’ picture (plastic, glass and paper recycling bins).
Page 7
We look at the plants and animals but we don’t touch... we just look... like with
binoculars or magnifying glasses.
Page 8
We re-cycle our rubbish so it can be used again. You look for the re-cycling picture
in the shops and that tells you something has been used again. Recycling bins are
special because you can make new stuff out of it.
We wash containers and use them again... like the ones for yoghurt.
Then they can be new again.
Page 9
We use water carefully so it doesn’t get wasted. We have rules for water like not
using too much in the sandpit.
We keep water clean so that baby animals can live and we can see them.