Learnscapes as Pedagogical Tools: Understanding Teachers Levels of Use. Keith Skamp Centre for Children & Young People School of Education Southern Cross.

Learnscapes as Pedagogical Tools: Learnscapes as Pedagogical Tools:

Understanding Teachers’ Levels of Use.Understanding Teachers’ Levels of Use.

Keith SkampKeith Skamp

Centre for Children & Young PeopleCentre for Children & Young People

School of Education School of Education

Southern Cross UniversitySouthern Cross University

Lismore, NSW, AustraliaLismore, NSW, Australia

Formal School EE in AustraliaFormal School EE in Australia EE for a Sustainable Future:National action Plan (2000)EE for a Sustainable Future:National action Plan (2000) National EE policy (to be released 2005)National EE policy (to be released 2005) EE is non-mandatory in all states except NSW:EE is non-mandatory in all states except NSW:

EE Policy for SchoolsEE Policy for Schools (NSW DET 2001) (NSW DET 2001)• EE mainly the focus in Science & Studies of Society & EE mainly the focus in Science & Studies of Society &

Environment KLAs (subjects)Environment KLAs (subjects)• Action and value outcomes (‘for’ the environment) not a Action and value outcomes (‘for’ the environment) not a

feature in school KLA curriculafeature in school KLA curricula Sustainability concepts underrepresented in curriculaSustainability concepts underrepresented in curricula Whole school approaches to EfS are increasing (e.g., Whole school approaches to EfS are increasing (e.g.,

Sustainable Schools Program in NSW) but mainly Sustainable Schools Program in NSW) but mainly primary levelprimary level

(continued next slide)(continued next slide)

Formal School EE in AustraliaFormal School EE in Australia

• Examples of citizen science occur (e.g., GLOBE/ Examples of citizen science occur (e.g., GLOBE/ Streamwatch)Streamwatch)

• EE Centres are in all States (but rarely ‘researched’); some EE Centres are in all States (but rarely ‘researched’); some using sustainability concepts, e.g., ecological footprintusing sustainability concepts, e.g., ecological footprint

• Partnerships are increasing (e.g., between councils and Partnerships are increasing (e.g., between councils and schools) encouraged by grants. Waste Wise Schools schools) encouraged by grants. Waste Wise Schools (Victoria) is an example.(Victoria) is an example.

• EE not a core element in preservice teacher education.EE not a core element in preservice teacher education.

(see: http://www.aries.mq.edu.au/ Tilbury, D., Coleman, V., Garlick, D. (2005). A National Review of Environmental Education and its Contribution to Sustainability in Australia: Formal Education. Report prepared by Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES) for the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government.)

Implementation of EE in NSWImplementation of EE in NSW• State EE Council: responsible forState EE Council: responsible for NSW Government EE Plan, Learning for SustainabilityNSW Government EE Plan, Learning for Sustainability . The . The

Council oversees EE across the State.Council oversees EE across the State.(www.environment.nsw.gov.au/cee)(www.environment.nsw.gov.au/cee)

• Environmental Education Policy for SchoolsEnvironmental Education Policy for Schools (NSW DET, (NSW DET, 2001) and an associated support document.2001) and an associated support document.

• EE is an across the curriculum orientationEE is an across the curriculum orientation Schools must have a SEMP (School Environmental Schools must have a SEMP (School Environmental

Management Plan) which embraces three EE foci: Management Plan) which embraces three EE foci: curriculum, management of resources and management of curriculum, management of resources and management of school grounds.school grounds.

Learnscapes has been an initiativeLearnscapes has been an initiative Evaluation of implementation of NSW DET Policy (2005) Evaluation of implementation of NSW DET Policy (2005)

suggests ‘curriculum’ is the weak link.suggests ‘curriculum’ is the weak link.

Context for the Learnscape Context for the Learnscape researchresearch

In NSWIn NSW Sustainable Schools Program encourages Sustainable Schools Program encourages

school ground development (accreditation school ground development (accreditation being trialled)being trialled)

Learnscapes: An aid to implementing your Learnscapes: An aid to implementing your School Environmental Management PlanSchool Environmental Management Plan (NSW DET, 2004) argues learnscapes can (NSW DET, 2004) argues learnscapes can be part of SEMPsbe part of SEMPs

See website See website www.www.curriculumsupportcurriculumsupport.nsw.edu.au/enviroed/index.cfm.nsw.edu.au/enviroed/index.cfm for NSW for NSW EE initiatives.EE initiatives.

Learnscapes are:Learnscapes are:

““spaces and places in and near school grounds that spaces and places in and near school grounds that provide a forum for hands-on learning experiences provide a forum for hands-on learning experiences related to environmental education”related to environmental education”

usually thought of as being “designed to permit usually thought of as being “designed to permit users to interact with an environment” andusers to interact with an environment” and

““may be natural or built, interior or exterior” may be natural or built, interior or exterior”

(Extracts from NSW DET EE Curriculum Policy for (Extracts from NSW DET EE Curriculum Policy for Schools and its support document, 2001)Schools and its support document, 2001)

Learnscape programs:Learnscape programs:

Are intended to integrate with the various Key Are intended to integrate with the various Key Learning Areas (KLAs)Learning Areas (KLAs)

Should address syllabus learning outcomes, including Should address syllabus learning outcomes, including the objectives of environmental education, especially the objectives of environmental education, especially “ecological sustainability” “ecological sustainability”

The involvement of the whole school and its community The involvement of the whole school and its community in their design and maintenance is encouraged.in their design and maintenance is encouraged.

(Extracts from NSW DET EE Curriculum Policy for Schools and its support document, 2001)

Implicit theory underpinning learnscapes

Not explicit in NSW DET documents although they expect teachers to use them as “pedagogical tools” (NSW DET, 2004, p.2)

Underlying theory(ies)Consistent with: Place-based education(e.g., Woodhouse & Knapp, 2000; Orr, 1994)

Teachers to use Learnscapes’ “affordances” for (ecological and other) learning; ‘affordance’ is integral to a learnscape’s nature as built with students’ characteristics in mind

(Malone & Trantor, 2002)

Experiential learning is implied.

Education about, in and for the environment Education about and for sustainability

Aim of the studyAim of the study

To investigate teachers’ self-reported practice of To investigate teachers’ self-reported practice of learnscapes at a primary school renown for its learnscapes at a primary school renown for its learnscapes (over a two year period)learnscapes (over a two year period)

(14 LS were noted by its Learnscape Coordinator, the most well known by the (14 LS were noted by its Learnscape Coordinator, the most well known by the staff being the rainforest, outdoor classroom and the rice paddies)staff being the rainforest, outdoor classroom and the rice paddies)

A previous study (A previous study (Environmental Education Research, 7Environmental Education Research, 7 (4), 2001, 333- (4), 2001, 333-358358) identified commonalities in perceptions related to the effect of identified commonalities in perceptions related to the effect of learnscapes on teaching and student learning in general and then across learnscapes on teaching and student learning in general and then across Key Learning Areas (KLAs) and Environmental Education (EE), in Key Learning Areas (KLAs) and Environmental Education (EE), in particularparticular..

Conceptual framework for research questionsConceptual framework for research questions

Use of learnscapes as a ‘pedagogical tool’ is an Use of learnscapes as a ‘pedagogical tool’ is an educational changeeducational change: it requires most teachers : it requires most teachers to “learn to do something differently” to “learn to do something differently” (Hoban, 2002, (Hoban, 2002,

p.164)p.164)

‘‘Different’ because teachers:Different’ because teachers:

Rarely teach outdoorsRarely teach outdoors

Do not focus in environmental education outcomesDo not focus in environmental education outcomes

Conceptual framework for research questions (cont.)Conceptual framework for research questions (cont.)

Educational change is a complex system comprised of many interdependent Educational change is a complex system comprised of many interdependent ‘change frames’ and the processes connecting them‘change frames’ and the processes connecting them(see Figure 2.1)(see Figure 2.1)

““Teacher learning” is a change frame within this system. It implies that ‘teacher Teacher learning” is a change frame within this system. It implies that ‘teacher learning’ is both cognitive learning’ is both cognitive and and social and ‘distributed social and ‘distributed amongamong influences on influences on learning’ (see Figure 2.2) and influenced by different actions (e.g., reflection)learning’ (see Figure 2.2) and influenced by different actions (e.g., reflection)

Classroom change begins with teachers examining their beliefs about practiceClassroom change begins with teachers examining their beliefs about practice

CBAM ModelCBAM Model It represents “theories of the learning process teachers go through as they gain It represents “theories of the learning process teachers go through as they gain

knowledge and develop skills in using new ideas and practices” (Anderson, 1997, knowledge and develop skills in using new ideas and practices” (Anderson, 1997, p.360).p.360).

[Not as encompassing as Complexity Theory model (Hoban ,2002)][Not as encompassing as Complexity Theory model (Hoban ,2002)]

Research questionsResearch questions

How has the availability of learnscapes impacted How has the availability of learnscapes impacted on the pedagogy of individual teachers? on the pedagogy of individual teachers?

What factors help in understanding the What factors help in understanding the pedagogies that particular teachers have pedagogies that particular teachers have adopted?adopted?

(‘(‘Factors’ are seen as interdependent, associated with ‘change frames’ and Factors’ are seen as interdependent, associated with ‘change frames’ and not related to change in a mechanistic cause-effect way)not related to change in a mechanistic cause-effect way)

Perspective used with these research questionsPerspective used with these research questions

Interpreted use of Learnscapes Interpreted use of Learnscapes as a “pedagogical tool’ to be as a “pedagogical tool’ to be change/ innovation change/ innovation

Can then ask:Can then ask:Do teachers understand why the Do teachers understand why the

change was introduced and how change was introduced and how to ‘use’ the change/innovation?to ‘use’ the change/innovation?

Is there a connection between Is there a connection between teacher concerns and teacher concerns and understanding and regularity of understanding and regularity of use of an innovation? use of an innovation?

What change frames are impacting What change frames are impacting on use of the innovation?on use of the innovation?

To respond to the two research To respond to the two research questions: appliedquestions: applied

• Hall and Hord’s (1987) Stages Hall and Hord’s (1987) Stages of Concern categorisation of of Concern categorisation of teachers’ levels of concern teachers’ levels of concern when dealing with curriculum when dealing with curriculum change (table 1);change (table 1);

• Dlamini, Rollnick and Dlamini, Rollnick and Bradley’s (2001) two Bradley’s (2001) two typologies of teacher change, typologies of teacher change, related to related to (a) teachers’ level of (a) teachers’ level of understanding of an innovation understanding of an innovation and and (b) their mode(s) of using the (b) their mode(s) of using the innovation (table 1).innovation (table 1).

• Hoban’s (2002) complexity Hoban’s (2002) complexity theory of changetheory of change

Stages of Concern, Hierarchy of Understanding & Typology of UtilisationStages of Concern, Hierarchy of Understanding & Typology of Utilisation

Stage of Concern (Hall & Hord, 1987)

Hierarchy of Understanding (Dlamini et al. 2001)

Typology of Utilisation

(Dlamini et al. 2001)

Awareness- teacher has no concerns about the innovation

Unawareness- teacher is unable to perceive differences in approach between the ideal practice and current practice

Drop-out- teacher who does not continue to use the strategies after the first attempt

Informational- teacher seeks information about the innovation but is unconcerned about how it impacts on them

Perception- teacher is able to recognise the differences in approach, between ideal and current practice

Struggler- teacher continues to use the innovation but at a very mechanical level, making few changes and with a low level of understanding

Person- teacher has concerns about how the innovation will impact on them, and whether they will be able to meet the necessary criteria

Utilisation- teacher is able to appropriately describe the use of the strategies in the trial

Domesticator- teacher who has taught successful lessons using the materials but has adapted the strategies to their normal teaching approach

Management- teacher focuses on the processes and tasks associated with running the innovation

Personalisation- teacher is able to apply the new strategies to their personal teaching style

Succeeder- teacher has successfully used the approach with understanding but not enough to be independent of the curriculum materials

Consequence- attention of the teacher is focussed on the impact of the innovation on students

Production- teacher is able to synthesise and develop contextualised lessons incorporating the new strategies

Innovator- teacher who understands the approach and is able to vary and generalise it to their other teaching

Collaboration- teacher focus on coordinating with other teachers

Refocussing- teacher extends the boundaries of the innovation and adapts it

Research ProceduresResearch Procedures

Research perspectiveResearch perspectiveAn interpretive perspective because aim was to ‘An interpretive perspective because aim was to ‘understandunderstand’ teachers’ decisions and insights ’ teachers’ decisions and insights

(derived from how teachers see their world).(derived from how teachers see their world).MethodologyMethodologyPhenomenological in nature in that author saw opportunity to explore an innovation within a Phenomenological in nature in that author saw opportunity to explore an innovation within a

school, and the teachers’ uses of an innovation.school, and the teachers’ uses of an innovation.Research questions emanated from reflection upon teachers’ responses from an initial study and Research questions emanated from reflection upon teachers’ responses from an initial study and

then further responses at a later time. Research questions then determined the direction of the then further responses at a later time. Research questions then determined the direction of the analysis.analysis.

MethodMethodSchool was a purposeful selection; Teachers and principal were all volunteers (all 8 first; 7 second, School was a purposeful selection; Teachers and principal were all volunteers (all 8 first; 7 second,

including 2 not teaching or available for first interview [M and A])including 2 not teaching or available for first interview [M and A])Semi-structured interviews (+ background about school/some observations): use of learnscapes, Semi-structured interviews (+ background about school/some observations): use of learnscapes,

their impact on teaching/learning (then probe KLA/EE learning)their impact on teaching/learning (then probe KLA/EE learning)Analysis not by coding but development of interview narratives related to learnscape use and then Analysis not by coding but development of interview narratives related to learnscape use and then

interpreted using typologies and change framesinterpreted using typologies and change framesCredibility: initial interview interpretations validated by teachers; similar independent Credibility: initial interview interpretations validated by teachers; similar independent

interpretations; principal’s views consistent; description ‘thick’/audit trail available; negative interpretations; principal’s views consistent; description ‘thick’/audit trail available; negative instances sought and reported.instances sought and reported.

What was found? What was found? Two years onTwo years on

OVERALLOVERALL Two infrequent users; four moderate to regular usersTwo infrequent users; four moderate to regular users LS were perceived more as places where KLA learning could occur LS were perceived more as places where KLA learning could occur

outdoors rather than as locations where EE outcomes were purposively outdoors rather than as locations where EE outcomes were purposively pursued (only 3 of 6 teachers referred to EE spontaneously in interviews)pursued (only 3 of 6 teachers referred to EE spontaneously in interviews)

Re: Categorising these teachers’ perceived useRe: Categorising these teachers’ perceived use A teacher’s level of use, understanding and stage of concern depended upon which A teacher’s level of use, understanding and stage of concern depended upon which

of these interpretations was used. of these interpretations was used. Grouped the six teachers Grouped the six teachers according to their use of learnscapes as outdoor teaching and according to their use of learnscapes as outdoor teaching and

learning areas, learning areas, irrespective of whether pedagogical emphases focussed on KLA or irrespective of whether pedagogical emphases focussed on KLA or EE outcomes. EE outcomes.

(when teachers used learnscapes with (when teachers used learnscapes with environmentalenvironmental learning outcomes in mind this has learning outcomes in mind this has been noted)been noted)

Categorisation of teachers re their concerns, Categorisation of teachers re their concerns, understanding and use of learnscapesunderstanding and use of learnscapes

Teacher Stage of Concern (Hall & Hord, 1987)

Hierarchy of Understanding


Typology of Utilisation


Chris Refocussing Production Innovator

Marianne Consequence Production Innovator

Kate Consequence Personalisation (Towards production)

Succeeder(Towards innovator)

Lauren Consequence Personalisation Succeeder(maybe innovator)

Annalee Personal to Management

Utilisation Domesticator

Nerida Personal to Management

Utilisation Struggler to domesticator

Details of how these teachers were classified along Details of how these teachers were classified along the three continua are on the following slidesthe three continua are on the following slides

If there is time details about the six teachers and If there is time details about the six teachers and their principal will be shown their principal will be shown

If not will move to assertions and conclusionsIf not will move to assertions and conclusions

A struggler trying to move forward:NeridaA struggler trying to move forward:Nerida

Nerida had used the outdoor areas a couple of times in the second year, and Nerida had used the outdoor areas a couple of times in the second year, and despite some initial success it is not a regular occurrence.despite some initial success it is not a regular occurrence.

Personal Level of Concern.Personal Level of Concern. She repeatedly expressed personal concerns about She repeatedly expressed personal concerns about her ability to manage her kindergarten class beyond the classroom- this seemed her ability to manage her kindergarten class beyond the classroom- this seemed to be related to her belief that she thought her children perceived that they were to be related to her belief that she thought her children perceived that they were not learning when outside. not learning when outside.

Utilisation Understanding LevelUtilisation Understanding Level. Could describe outdoor teaching techniques.. Could describe outdoor teaching techniques. There are positive signs that Nerida is progressing, e.g., she was starting to There are positive signs that Nerida is progressing, e.g., she was starting to

recognise differences with teaching using learnscapes.recognise differences with teaching using learnscapes. Her occasional use of learnscapes seemed to be focussed on achieving learning Her occasional use of learnscapes seemed to be focussed on achieving learning

outcomes in particular KLAs (e.g., a language walk illustrating concepts like outcomes in particular KLAs (e.g., a language walk illustrating concepts like ‘through’ and ‘under’), but there was no overt emphasis on EE outcomes. ‘through’ and ‘under’), but there was no overt emphasis on EE outcomes.

Nerida appeared to believe that simply being in the school would assist Nerida appeared to believe that simply being in the school would assist students in developing a caring environmental attitude (e.g., planting their tree students in developing a caring environmental attitude (e.g., planting their tree in kindergarten and watching its progress). in kindergarten and watching its progress).

An apparent contradiction in Nerida’s limited use of learnscapes was that she An apparent contradiction in Nerida’s limited use of learnscapes was that she described herself as an ‘outdoors person’; this, though, may be a factor in her described herself as an ‘outdoors person’; this, though, may be a factor in her ongoing desire to use the outdoors more.ongoing desire to use the outdoors more.

A struggling domesticator still with A struggling domesticator still with management concerns but a keen EE outlookmanagement concerns but a keen EE outlook

Annalee used the learnscapes infrequently but had a stronger Annalee used the learnscapes infrequently but had a stronger orientation towards EE outcomes (but not necessarily outside orientation towards EE outcomes (but not necessarily outside the classroom). the classroom).

Was mainly focussed on her Was mainly focussed on her management concerns management concerns Utilisation knowledge levelUtilisation knowledge level as she does describe how teaching as she does describe how teaching

outdoors “tends to equalise you a little bit as you are not “the outdoors “tends to equalise you a little bit as you are not “the teacher at the front of the class”; outside learning “keeps us all teacher at the front of the class”; outside learning “keeps us all on the one playing field feeling”.on the one playing field feeling”.

Of especial interest is Annalee’s strong environmental Of especial interest is Annalee’s strong environmental orientation while realising her inability to translate that into orientation while realising her inability to translate that into practice (compared herself to Chris’ teaching). practice (compared herself to Chris’ teaching).

Her class experience EE vicariously and Annalee knew it.Her class experience EE vicariously and Annalee knew it.

Succeeders bordering on innovators:LaurenSucceeders bordering on innovators:Lauren

Lauren – Lauren – nownow a regular user of the school learnscapes- a regular user of the school learnscapes- currently she was “outside currently she was “outside with every lesson with year 4”with every lesson with year 4”; interesting case as she was only teaching music ; interesting case as she was only teaching music and drama.and drama.

There was a focus on the There was a focus on the consequences for student learningconsequences for student learning when using when using

learnscapes:learnscapes: ““Being in a situation like that (the learnscapes) the children are possibly Being in a situation like that (the learnscapes) the children are possibly more forthcoming with what they talk about and what ideas they come up more forthcoming with what they talk about and what ideas they come up with. I think the environment they’re in encourages more broader with. I think the environment they’re in encourages more broader thinking by looking, feeling, imagining it not being there- that sort of thinking by looking, feeling, imagining it not being there- that sort of thing. Maybe they become more involved in discussion”.thing. Maybe they become more involved in discussion”.

Uses learnscapes “as you need it”, to achieve curriculum purposes, and which Uses learnscapes “as you need it”, to achieve curriculum purposes, and which could not have been done “nearly as effectively” otherwisecould not have been done “nearly as effectively” otherwise

At the At the personalization knowledgepersonalization knowledge stage, as she applies her (apparent) outdoor stage, as she applies her (apparent) outdoor teaching strategies to whatever subject she is teaching, and they have become part teaching strategies to whatever subject she is teaching, and they have become part of her teaching style. She of her teaching style. She nevernever mentions management concerns. mentions management concerns.

Interesting in a number of ways:Interesting in a number of ways:• EE was part of her music and drama-in an incidental but semi-regular wayEE was part of her music and drama-in an incidental but semi-regular way• Notable because she was Notable because she was not not involved in the LS development.involved in the LS development.

Succeeders bordering on innovators: KateSucceeders bordering on innovators: Kate Kate is more definitely placed at the Kate is more definitely placed at the succeeder moving towards succeeder moving towards

innovator level of use.innovator level of use. One of three teachers (with Chris and Marianne) who referred to the One of three teachers (with Chris and Marianne) who referred to the

value of learnscapes for EE value of learnscapes for EE beforebefore it was raised in the interviews. it was raised in the interviews. At the At the consequence stage of concernconsequence stage of concern, as she regularly focussed on , as she regularly focussed on

the impact of using the outdoors to obtain a greater impact on her the impact of using the outdoors to obtain a greater impact on her students’ KLA learning and she saw as important “just making them students’ KLA learning and she saw as important “just making them (children) aware that the school is not just the school classroom. You (children) aware that the school is not just the school classroom. You can have a classroom outside and do lots of learning in the can have a classroom outside and do lots of learning in the learnscape areas”. learnscape areas”.

With respect to EE Kate spoke of a general environmental With respect to EE Kate spoke of a general environmental awareness. She contrasted trying to engage students about snow awareness. She contrasted trying to engage students about snow before an excursion of the snowfields (and how “very very difficult” before an excursion of the snowfields (and how “very very difficult” it was) versus not having to go to a rainforest (for similar learning it was) versus not having to go to a rainforest (for similar learning purposes) because it was a school learnscape… purposes) because it was a school learnscape…

Apart from Chris, Kate was the only teacher who articulated her Apart from Chris, Kate was the only teacher who articulated her specific environmental knowledge. specific environmental knowledge. (cont next slide)(cont next slide)

Succeeders bordering on innovators: Kate Succeeders bordering on innovators: Kate (cont.)(cont.)

At the At the personalisation knowledge levelpersonalisation knowledge level. She appeared to be able to . She appeared to be able to apply her outdoor (and to some extent, her EE) teaching strategies apply her outdoor (and to some extent, her EE) teaching strategies to whatever subject she was teaching, and these strategies had to whatever subject she was teaching, and these strategies had become part of her everyday teaching become part of her everyday teaching

(Learnscapes are mentioned in her teaching programs but (Learnscapes are mentioned in her teaching programs but emphasises that learnscapes are used “informally” as well). emphasises that learnscapes are used “informally” as well).

Kate indicated the many ways that you could teach using Kate indicated the many ways that you could teach using learnscapes: a “teacher directed” or “student directed” way. This learnscapes: a “teacher directed” or “student directed” way. This would suggest both formal and informal production knowledge, as would suggest both formal and informal production knowledge, as able to incorporate learnscapes in a range of learning situations; able to incorporate learnscapes in a range of learning situations; however this probably does not apply to the use of learnscapes for however this probably does not apply to the use of learnscapes for EE purposes. EE purposes.

The innovators- at personal level: MarianneThe innovators- at personal level: Marianne

Marianne, a long term casual teacher at the school; Marianne, a long term casual teacher at the school; particularly liked “outdoor education”.particularly liked “outdoor education”.

At the At the consequence stage of concernconsequence stage of concern: cited numerous : cited numerous instances of the positive effects of outdoor learning instances of the positive effects of outdoor learning with her classes. For example, in a unit on minibeasts: with her classes. For example, in a unit on minibeasts: (but what is)more rewarding is the impact it has on children. I see (but what is)more rewarding is the impact it has on children. I see

children that cannot succeed for one reason or another inside the four children that cannot succeed for one reason or another inside the four walls of a classroom suddenly be engaged in such a spontaneous way walls of a classroom suddenly be engaged in such a spontaneous way with learnscapes. For instance we were out collecting slaters the other with learnscapes. For instance we were out collecting slaters the other day and a little (year 4) child came up who has never spoken to me day and a little (year 4) child came up who has never spoken to me before- he came up to me spontaneously and just told me what a before- he came up to me spontaneously and just told me what a wonderful activity it was to go searching for slaters in the rainforest…to wonderful activity it was to go searching for slaters in the rainforest…to me that is really…enough. [cont next slide]me that is really…enough. [cont next slide]

The innovators- at personal level: The innovators- at personal level: Marianne (cont)Marianne (cont)

She continued that you can see it (the excitement and the She continued that you can see it (the excitement and the learning) in “their faces”:learning) in “their faces”:

those children who, for instance, haven’t experienced success before, or those children who, for instance, haven’t experienced success before, or not much of it, experiencing success out in the environment- they seem to not much of it, experiencing success out in the environment- they seem to lose inhibition, They seem to acquire the skills of questioning which seems lose inhibition, They seem to acquire the skills of questioning which seems to be a dying art these days…They enquire…seek information…question. to be a dying art these days…They enquire…seek information…question. The way they work together cooperatively. I think generally their self-The way they work together cooperatively. I think generally their self-esteem and their sense of feeling good about what they’re doing. I also esteem and their sense of feeling good about what they’re doing. I also think a lot of what we teach these days lacks purpose. I think the children think a lot of what we teach these days lacks purpose. I think the children knowing that it is their future- their environment- I think they’re knowing that it is their future- their environment- I think they’re recognizing their responsibility in caring for it, so they’re enthused, they’re recognizing their responsibility in caring for it, so they’re enthused, they’re motivated and they’re intrigued.motivated and they’re intrigued.

She spoke of how she had overcome management difficulties: She spoke of how she had overcome management difficulties: “my teaching style has changed somewhat- I think because of “my teaching style has changed somewhat- I think because of my own interest in fostering concern with the kids for the my own interest in fostering concern with the kids for the environment”.environment”. [cont next slide] [cont next slide]

The innovators- at personal level: The innovators- at personal level: Marianne (cont)Marianne (cont)

Marianne’s knowledge of the processes involved suggested Marianne’s knowledge of the processes involved suggested that she may be at the that she may be at the production knowledge levelproduction knowledge level- she - she regularly plans lessons that use learnscapes in order to make regularly plans lessons that use learnscapes in order to make learning more meaningful; learnscapes had changed herlearning more meaningful; learnscapes had changed her “planning”. “planning”.

Marianne would appear to be a user at the iMarianne would appear to be a user at the innovatornnovator level, but level, but notnot directly influencing the school (probably because of her directly influencing the school (probably because of her casual status): “becausecasual status): “because I know learnscapes are there” she I know learnscapes are there” she “structures activities that involve… KLAs out in the “structures activities that involve… KLAs out in the learnscapes”. She has generalized the presence of learnscapes learnscapes”. She has generalized the presence of learnscapes and outdoor learning into her normal teaching repertoire. The and outdoor learning into her normal teaching repertoire. The possible reason for her use of learnscapes was her possible reason for her use of learnscapes was her passion for passion for the environment.the environment.

The innovator-at personal & school levels: ChrisThe innovator-at personal & school levels: Chris Chris- inspired staff change through Chris- inspired staff change through enthusiasmenthusiasm and and

modellingmodelling.. (School Environmental Club- students from each grade- Streamwatch, Birdwatch, (School Environmental Club- students from each grade- Streamwatch, Birdwatch,

rice paddies care etc.; initiated and organised the WED) rice paddies care etc.; initiated and organised the WED)

At the At the collaboration stage of concerncollaboration stage of concern, BUT Chris had , BUT Chris had extended the boundaries of the innovation, adapted extended the boundaries of the innovation, adapted and even critiqued it, i.e., and even critiqued it, i.e., refocussing concern stagerefocussing concern stage. . He advanced the view that although it may be argued He advanced the view that although it may be argued thatthat::““this is where we are going to have a learnscape… and that is how it is going to be this is where we are going to have a learnscape… and that is how it is going to be

used for these KLAs as far as outcomes…it doesn’t seem to work that way. used for these KLAs as far as outcomes…it doesn’t seem to work that way. You look at something and you think, ‘Well how can I use it and how could we You look at something and you think, ‘Well how can I use it and how could we get involved in it’ ”.get involved in it’ ”.

(He was critical of the concept ‘learnscape’ as it conjured up the picture that the NSW DET (He was critical of the concept ‘learnscape’ as it conjured up the picture that the NSW DET had invented a new idea which Chris saw as no different to ‘school environmental areas’ had invented a new idea which Chris saw as no different to ‘school environmental areas’ which the Gould League had promoted for decades.) [cont. next slide]which the Gould League had promoted for decades.) [cont. next slide]

The innovators- at personal and school levels: Chris (cont)The innovators- at personal and school levels: Chris (cont) At the At the production knowledge levelproduction knowledge level (prepared syllabus and curriculum (prepared syllabus and curriculum

policy support documents; always looking for ways to incorporate the policy support documents; always looking for ways to incorporate the “outside” into the various subjects. His students “…seem to enjoy…the “outside” into the various subjects. His students “…seem to enjoy…the pattern” of studying the environment. pattern” of studying the environment.

Citing examples related to “studying rice growing” and Operation Birdwatch, Citing examples related to “studying rice growing” and Operation Birdwatch, when done over a period of years “it becomes structured…we tell them what when done over a period of years “it becomes structured…we tell them what to do… what we’re going to look for, why we’re doing it…”; the “older to do… what we’re going to look for, why we’re doing it…”; the “older kids… tell the younger ones”. kids… tell the younger ones”.

Always a strong overt environmental emphasis over many years, e.g., Always a strong overt environmental emphasis over many years, e.g., Birdwatch was “test(ing) the health of the school playground”.Birdwatch was “test(ing) the health of the school playground”.

The only teacher to ‘teach’ sustainable practices in a concrete way. The only teacher to ‘teach’ sustainable practices in a concrete way. “ “what we've done, is to use that (rice paddies) to teach the rice growing what we've done, is to use that (rice paddies) to teach the rice growing

cycle… it's like planting, irrigating, harvesting and threshing, milling and cycle… it's like planting, irrigating, harvesting and threshing, milling and then selling it or eating it and then saving some seeds for the next cycle; and then selling it or eating it and then saving some seeds for the next cycle; and showing to the children how it is a sustainable agricultural system; using that showing to the children how it is a sustainable agricultural system; using that to teach Indonesian and also to sort of teach I guess EE, science and to teach Indonesian and also to sort of teach I guess EE, science and technology…”. technology…”.

[Background- social science/ geographical knowledge about environmental matters and [Background- social science/ geographical knowledge about environmental matters and mapping skills; saw himself as an “outdoors teacher” ( three schools).] [cont. next slide]mapping skills; saw himself as an “outdoors teacher” ( three schools).] [cont. next slide]

The innovators- at personal and school levels: Chris (cont)The innovators- at personal and school levels: Chris (cont)

In his modest way Chris has impacted on the In his modest way Chris has impacted on the lives of many teachers and students through lives of many teachers and students through his belief in outdoor education and his belief in outdoor education and environmental awareness and his constant environmental awareness and his constant modelling of that belief.modelling of that belief.

All teachers interviewed referred to Chris in a All teachers interviewed referred to Chris in a positive and inspiring manner.positive and inspiring manner.

The principal’s perceptionsThe principal’s perceptionsLeadershipLeadership Eric was a non-teaching principal supportive of LS: through encouragement Eric was a non-teaching principal supportive of LS: through encouragement

[Chris directly] and financial assistance; loved LS (and occasionally taught [Chris directly] and financial assistance; loved LS (and occasionally taught children using LS.) children using LS.)

Had not advocated an ideal ‘Innovation Profile’ for LS use. Probably a ‘laissez Had not advocated an ideal ‘Innovation Profile’ for LS use. Probably a ‘laissez faire’ orientation- innovation use to be discovered through the implementation faire’ orientation- innovation use to be discovered through the implementation process (Anderson, 1997)process (Anderson, 1997)

Seemed to have a real sense of what his teachers were thinkingSeemed to have a real sense of what his teachers were thinkingReflectionsReflections Eric- a year later- teachers “are less resistant to using learnscapes Eric- a year later- teachers “are less resistant to using learnscapes

Cited the impact of outside “science exploration day” (WED)Cited the impact of outside “science exploration day” (WED)

Teachers think of LS more as a place where you go and do learning Teachers think of LS more as a place where you go and do learning “probably “probably see(ing) real value in taking children into what they regard as a different learning see(ing) real value in taking children into what they regard as a different learning environment and seeing it as important for children’s discovery learning in particular”. environment and seeing it as important for children’s discovery learning in particular”. [not necessarily EE/rather ‘experiential’][not necessarily EE/rather ‘experiential’]

Felt that most teachers would only associate EE with science teaching and Felt that most teachers would only associate EE with science teaching and mainly in the rainforest. (contrast Lauren) mainly in the rainforest. (contrast Lauren)

Teachers may still be struggling because of time; outdoor management issues; Teachers may still be struggling because of time; outdoor management issues; and possibly teacher personality (‘outdoor people’).and possibly teacher personality (‘outdoor people’).

FindingsFindingsRQ 1: RQ 1: How has the availability of learnscapes impacted on How has the availability of learnscapes impacted on

the pedagogy of individual teachers?the pedagogy of individual teachers?

The ‘inertia’ of existing practice was disturbed to The ‘inertia’ of existing practice was disturbed to different degrees: their pedagogies affected in different degrees: their pedagogies affected in various ways various ways (from struggler to innovator -see table 1) (from struggler to innovator -see table 1)

(Not assumed that all would become succeeders etc.)(Not assumed that all would become succeeders etc.)

Hoban argues teachers must see a ‘purpose’/ ‘need’ to Hoban argues teachers must see a ‘purpose’/ ‘need’ to change (here impact on student affect & learning)change (here impact on student affect & learning)

Overall certainly positive (cf. 5% use excursions in Overall certainly positive (cf. 5% use excursions in science )science )

RQ2: What factors help in understanding the RQ2: What factors help in understanding the pedagogies that particular teachers have adopted?pedagogies that particular teachers have adopted?

• Identified interdependent ‘factors’ relate to change frames of ‘teacher Identified interdependent ‘factors’ relate to change frames of ‘teacher learning’ (1 to 3), school leadership (4) and structure (4).learning’ (1 to 3), school leadership (4) and structure (4).

Teachers’ “conceptions of teaching” is critical to obtaining change (Hoban, Teachers’ “conceptions of teaching” is critical to obtaining change (Hoban, 2002); here their views about what is involved in teaching outdoors.2002); here their views about what is involved in teaching outdoors.

• CBAM: change is “evolving from (a) lack of knowledge and skill” CBAM: change is “evolving from (a) lack of knowledge and skill” (Anderson, 1997) (Anderson, 1997)

Aligns with first two factorsAligns with first two factors

• Change evolves from existing practices (here an ever-increasing Change evolves from existing practices (here an ever-increasing realisation of what LS pedagogy could achieve (Leithwood & realisation of what LS pedagogy could achieve (Leithwood & Montgomery, in Anderson)Montgomery, in Anderson)

Consistent with third factorConsistent with third factor[cont next slide][cont next slide]

RQ2: What factors help in understanding the pedagogies that particular RQ2: What factors help in understanding the pedagogies that particular teachers have adopted? (cont)teachers have adopted? (cont)

Interdependent ‘Factors’ related to ‘change Interdependent ‘Factors’ related to ‘change frames’frames’

1.1. Familiarity with learnscapesFamiliarity with learnscapesMore regular and varied users:More regular and varied users: Seemed to understand the change more (see Table 2)Seemed to understand the change more (see Table 2) Seemed to appreciate impact on environmental outcomes more [exception- Seemed to appreciate impact on environmental outcomes more [exception-

Annalee, but not specific environmental knowledge]Annalee, but not specific environmental knowledge] Expressed environmental knowledge of the affordance of each LS (in two Expressed environmental knowledge of the affordance of each LS (in two

cases) [cf. Shulman]cases) [cf. Shulman]

[cont next slide][cont next slide]


2. Focussing on the consequences of using Learnscapes2. Focussing on the consequences of using Learnscapes

Teachers used LS more if they appreciated the learning Teachers used LS more if they appreciated the learning potential of LS and adapted their teaching style to suit potential of LS and adapted their teaching style to suit outdoor learning (see table 2)outdoor learning (see table 2)

(To be a succeeder does not require being at collaborative/ (To be a succeeder does not require being at collaborative/ refocussing levels of concern)refocussing levels of concern)



3A. Awareness of multiple learning outcomes from LS use3A. Awareness of multiple learning outcomes from LS use

Used LS more if:Used LS more if:perceived that LS contributed to a perceived that LS contributed to a wider range of learning wider range of learning outcomes outcomes (eg learning outcomes other than those focussing on (eg learning outcomes other than those focussing on say just ‘science’ and ‘understanding’):say just ‘science’ and ‘understanding’):

“ “ learning to do surveys and going out and classifying and working out what you’re learning to do surveys and going out and classifying and working out what you’re looking for and then coming back and reporting on it and interpreting, classifying… it’s looking for and then coming back and reporting on it and interpreting, classifying… it’s all to do with problem solving… everything they do as far as all to do with problem solving… everything they do as far as outsideoutside… even when it … even when it comes to social skills…(they are) being taught in (all) the KLAs (Chris)comes to social skills…(they are) being taught in (all) the KLAs (Chris)

Only Chris referred to problem solving as a EE outcome while Only Chris referred to problem solving as a EE outcome while Marianne alluded to general scientific enquiry.Marianne alluded to general scientific enquiry.


3B. Appreciating social learning as a key outcome from 3B. Appreciating social learning as a key outcome from LS useLS use

The Land Care group exampleThe Land Care group example: : Landcare is “a group thing…people who take over, some people become leaders Landcare is “a group thing…people who take over, some people become leaders and other people organizing things…you learn from other people that you work and other people organizing things…you learn from other people that you work with, that you talk and you sort of socialize”.with, that you talk and you sort of socialize”.

Chris speculated whether the rice farm tasks were “training in doing that (Landcare Chris speculated whether the rice farm tasks were “training in doing that (Landcare ‘thing’)” (considering how some students ‘behaved’ when doing these tasks) ‘thing’)” (considering how some students ‘behaved’ when doing these tasks)

Out of school learning is “socially-culturally mediated” (Hyllested, 2004) and oriented Out of school learning is “socially-culturally mediated” (Hyllested, 2004) and oriented to group learning (Rennie et al., 2004)to group learning (Rennie et al., 2004)



3C. Focussing on the encounter rather than the outcome3C. Focussing on the encounter rather than the outcomeThis tended to be Chris’ (and maybe Kate’s) approachThis tended to be Chris’ (and maybe Kate’s) approach

Compare: Eisner’s ‘expressive’ objectives/ Stenhouse’s Principles of Compare: Eisner’s ‘expressive’ objectives/ Stenhouse’s Principles of Procedure/ the values associated with ‘Place-based’ education.Procedure/ the values associated with ‘Place-based’ education.

Maybe embed outcomes in LS experience Maybe embed outcomes in LS experience afterafter have decided to encounter have decided to encounter the LS. the LS.



4. Being open to school level facilitation and 4. Being open to school level facilitation and professional developmentprofessional development

(social and situated dimensions of school change)(social and situated dimensions of school change)

Policy, game plan and game plan components Policy, game plan and game plan components (CBAM ‘Intervention (CBAM ‘Intervention Taxonomy’)Taxonomy’)

Policy Policy not evident in relation to pedagogy except in initial site not evident in relation to pedagogy except in initial site development plansdevelopment plans

Principal’s support of Chris and staff + staff meetings + financial support Principal’s support of Chris and staff + staff meetings + financial support (implied (implied gpgp))

WED (PD) + Chris’ modelling (WED (PD) + Chris’ modelling (gpgp componentscomponents); General teacher-talk + ); General teacher-talk + interviews interviews (incidental gp components)(incidental gp components)

(School infrastructure for LS use?- Elements of short and long term planning but not ‘formal’ (School infrastructure for LS use?- Elements of short and long term planning but not ‘formal’ “participative enquiry”;“participative enquiry”;

-Teacher sharing of ideas- -Teacher sharing of ideas- effective PDeffective PD but limited injection of new ideas [single site]) but limited injection of new ideas [single site])[cont next slide][cont next slide]


4. 4. Being open to school level facilitation and Being open to school level facilitation and professional developmentprofessional development (cont.) (cont.)

Leadership and changeLeadership and change

Teachers did not refer to principal but all mentioned Teachers did not refer to principal but all mentioned Chris (“second change facilitator”)Chris (“second change facilitator”)



Other Change IssuesOther Change Issues

‘‘Ownership’ of the change may not be a required Ownership’ of the change may not be a required condition for changecondition for change(but may impact on EE learning outcomes as a focus) (but may impact on EE learning outcomes as a focus)

External factors (priorities)External factors (priorities)(Raised question of ‘forcing’ change [Eric] and the interesting (Raised question of ‘forcing’ change [Eric] and the interesting

issue of whether it is better for teachers to teach in ways with issue of whether it is better for teachers to teach in ways with which they are familiar than to use an ‘innovation’ which they are familiar than to use an ‘innovation’ ineffectively [Dlamini et al. 2001]. Again teachers must see ineffectively [Dlamini et al. 2001]. Again teachers must see need for change [Hoban, 2002])need for change [Hoban, 2002])

Interdependent conditions related to ‘Teacher Interdependent conditions related to ‘Teacher Learning’ for change (Here LS as ‘pedagogical tools’)Learning’ for change (Here LS as ‘pedagogical tools’)

(see Figure 3A)(see Figure 3A)A possible interpretation A possible interpretation [Hoban, 2002][Hoban, 2002]

Student feedback Student feedback (major influence)(major influence)

Action Action (within authentic contexts): WED + teachers’ own efforts(within authentic contexts): WED + teachers’ own efforts

Community Community (embryonic)(embryonic)

Reflection Reflection (mainly ad-hoc)(mainly ad-hoc)

Conceptual inputs Conceptual inputs (were within-school including modelling + (were within-school including modelling + NSW DET publications- not mentioned)NSW DET publications- not mentioned)

ConclusionsConclusions

An innovation with no prescribed ‘Innovation Profile’: An innovation with no prescribed ‘Innovation Profile’: Pedagogical change ‘explained’ byPedagogical change ‘explained’ by

Matrix of processes involving many factors both internal and externalMatrix of processes involving many factors both internal and external ‘‘Teacher learning’ change frame seemed most important with the support of Teacher learning’ change frame seemed most important with the support of

‘school leadership’ (second change facilitator)‘school leadership’ (second change facilitator)

As there is “access to practice as a resource for learning” (a condition required for As there is “access to practice as a resource for learning” (a condition required for change- [Hoban,2002]) and discussion about practice, although embryonic, present, change- [Hoban,2002]) and discussion about practice, although embryonic, present, there is potential for further use of LS as a pedagogical tool.there is potential for further use of LS as a pedagogical tool.

Schools in similar situations could reflect on these findings to encourage LS useSchools in similar situations could reflect on these findings to encourage LS use

Will the NSW DET’s new EE policy (EfS emphasis) and LS as part of SEMPs help?Will the NSW DET’s new EE policy (EfS emphasis) and LS as part of SEMPs help?

ReferencesReferencesALLISON, B., O’SULLIVAN, T., OWEN, A., RICE, J., ROTHWELL, A. & SAUNDERS, C.

(1996) Research Skills for Students (London, Kogan Page).

ANDERSON, (1997) Understanding teacher change: Revisiting the Concerns Based Adoption Model, Curriculum Inquiry, 27(3), 331-367.

BRADY, L. (2003) Curriculum Construction, 2nd edn. (Sydney, Pearson).

BRONFENBRENNER, U. (1997) The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).

BRYMAN, A. (2001) Social Research Methods (Oxford, Oxford University Press).

DAVIS, J. (1997) Bringing it all together: partnerships, holisms, and futures, Australian Journal of EnvironmentalEducation,13, 93-94.

CUTTER-MACKENZIE, A. & SMITH, R. (2003) Ecological literacy: The missing paradigm in environmental education (part one) Environmental Education Research, 9(4), 497-524.

DLAMINI, B., ROLLNICK, M. & BRADLEY, J. (2001) Typologies of teacher change: A model based on case study of eight primary school teachers who used an STS approach to teaching science, paper presented at the Conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Sydney, Australia, July.

EISNER, E. (1985) The Art of Educational Evaluation: A Personal View (Philadelphia, PA: Falmer).

GOODRUM, D., HACKLING, M., & RENNIE, L. (2001) The Status and Quality of Teaching and Learning of Science in Australian schools, (Canberra, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs).

References (cont.)

GOODSON, I. (2001) Social histories of educational change, Journal of Educational Change, 2(1), 45-63.

GOUGH, A. (1997) Education and the Environment (Melbourne, Australian Council for Educational Research).

GRALTON, A., SINCLAIR, M. & PURNELL. (2004) Changes in attitudes. Beliefs and behaviour: A critical review of research into the impacts of environmental education initiatives, Australian Journal of Environmental Education,20(2), 41-52.

GUSKEY, T. (1995) Results-oriented professional development: In search of an optimal mix of effective practices. (North Coast Regional Educational Laboratory). Available online at: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/rpl_esys/pdlitrev.htm (acces sed March 8 2005).

HALL, G. & HORD, S. (1987) Changes in Schools: Facilitating the Process (New York, State of New York Press).

HOBAN, G. (2002) Teacher Learning for Educational Change (Buckingham, Open University Press).

HYLLESTED, T. (2004) What is the influence of out-of-school settings for learning?, paper presented at the Conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Armidale, Australia, July.

KOLB, D. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as a Source of Learning and Development, (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass)

LUCAS, B. (1997)Learning through landscapes: the importance of school grounds, Australian Journal of Environmental Education,13, 85-88.

MALONE, K. (2004) ‘Holding environments’: Creating spaces to support children’s environmental learning in the 21st Century, Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 20(2), 53-66.

References (cont.)

MALONE, K. & TRANTOR, P. (2003) School grounds as sites for learning: making the most of environmental opportunities, Environmental Education Research, 9(3), 279-303.

NEUMAN, W. (2000) Social Research Methods, 4th edn (Boston, MA, Allyn and Bacon).

NSW DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. (1989) Environmental Education Curriculum Statement (Sydney, NSW Department of Education).

NSW DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION & TRAINING (NSW DET). (2001a) Implementing the Environmental Education Policy in Your School (Sydney, NSW DET).

NSW DET. (2001b) Environmental Education Policy for Schools (Sydney, NSW DET).NSW DET. (c.2004) Learnscapes: An Aid to Implementing Your School Environmental

Management Plan (NSW DET, Sydney).ORION, N., HOFSYEIN, A., TAMIR, P. & GIDDINGS, G. (1997) Development and

validation of an instrument for assessing the learning environment of outdoor science activities, Science Education, 81(2),161-171.

ORR, D. (1994) Earth in Mind (Washington, Island Press).PUNCH, K. (1998) Introduction to Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative

Approaches (London, Sage).

References (cont.)RENNIE, L., FEHER, E., DIERKING, L. & FALK, J. (2003) Towards an agenda for

advancing research on science learning in out-of-school settings, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40 (2), 112-120.

SENGE, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation (New York, Doubleday).

SHEFFIELD, R., HACKLING, M., & GOODRUM, D. (2004) Mapping changes in teachers’ practice during a professional learning program: Collaborative Australian Secondary Science Program (CASSP), paper presented at the Conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Armidale, Australia, July.

SHULMAN, L. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: Foundations for new reform, Harvard Educational Review, 7 (1), 1-22.

SKAMP. K. (1986) Curriculum development: The process model revisited, Curriculum Perspectives, 6 (1), 7-11

AUTHOR, K., &BERGMANN, I. (2001) Facilitating learnscape development, maintenance and use: Teachers’ perceptions and self-reported practice, Environmental Education Research 7(4), 333-358.

STENHOUSE, L. (1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development (London, Heinemann Educational).

References (cont.)References (cont.)TILBURY, D. (1995) Environmental education for sustainability: Defining the

new focus for environmental education, Environmental Education Research 1(2), 195-212.

TILBURY, D. (2004) Rising to the challenge: Education for sustainability in Australia, Australian Journal for Environmental Education, 20(2), 103-114.

TILBURY, D., COLEMAN, V., & GARLICK, D. (2004) Environmental Education and its contribution to Sustainability in Australia: Formal Education. Report prepared by the Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES) for the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government (Sydney: ARIES).

TYAS TUNGAAL, H. (1999) Learnscapes: making significant changes in Australian school yards, OzEEnews,77, 1.

WOODHOUSE, J. & KNAPP, C (2000) Place-based curriculum and instruction: Outdoor and environmental education, ERIC Digest. Available online at: http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-3/place.htm (accessed 24 March 2005).

YEARNEY JR. R (1975) A case study from the research for training science teachers in the use of inductive/indirect strategies, Science Education 59(4), pp.521-529.References (cont.)References (cont.)

Contact DetailsContact Details

Should you like a copy of the PowerPoint Should you like a copy of the PowerPoint presentation simply email:presentation simply email:

[email protected]@scu.edu.au

Learnscapes as Pedagogical Tools: Understanding Teachers Levels of Use. Keith Skamp Centre for Children & Young People School of Education Southern Cross.

Documents

nsw ee initiatives

formal school ee

australia ee

implementation of ee

ee foci

nsw government ee plan

schools nsw det

nsw det ee curriculum