Week Two Posting Options

For this weekend's reading post, you can respond to any one of the following readings:

Leslie Marmon Silko, "Landscape, History, and the Pueblo Imagination" from Listening to Earth

Marilou Awiakta, "The Press: Watchdog with a Blind Eye" from Selu: Seeking the Corn-Mother's Wisdom

Derek Owens, "Boredom and Hyperboredom" from Composition and Sustainability

Barbara Kingsolver, "The Memory Place" from High Tide in Tucson: Essays from Now or Never

Last child in the Woods: Saving our Children From Nature-Deficit Disorder

   Richard Louv states, "The findings are stunning: environment based education produces student gains in social studies, science, language arts, and math; improves standardized test scores…" I agree completely with Louv that environment based teaching probably does help with a plethora of subjects and overall performance.  I feel as though Louv is over simplifying the situation by giving all the credit to environmental based learning.  Gardner's theory of multiple intelligence states that there are 8 multiple intelligences that students use to learn.  Most people favor only a few of these intelligences which is a really big complication for teachers because it means every student will learn differently.  As a future science teacher it has become apparent to me that my biggest challenge might not be my understanding of many areas of science, but instead how to relay the information I know effectively to my students.  In a typical classroom teachers focus on Mathematical logical and linguistic styles of learning because they are simple to teach; in other words only some students are learning to their max potential.  In an environment based learning system more of the 8 multiple intelligence's are easily accessible just because of the classroom set up.  In an outdoor setting students tend to be more hands on, which is very important for making meaningful connections between their lives and the subject material.  As a physics tutor my students always learn better if they can relate what we are learning to their every day lives.  The more freedom teachers have in the methods they can use to teach students the more likely it will be for students to make meaningful relationships with the information being taught.  The environment based learning lends itself to making connections to the world around us which in turn improves our memory of a subject.  Overall I agree with Louv about the exceptionality and benefits of environment based learning, but  I  do think Louv over simplifies why the benefits of environment based learning exist.​

Natural School Reform

In the Chapter, "Natural School Reform", Richard Louv describes the ways in which environmental or experiential education is beneficial to children -- more so than traditional education. The author describes environmental education as having a "focus on how to live correctly in the world", and experiential education as a way to "teach through the senses in the natural world" (201). To support his argument, Louv cites Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences, specifically the naturalist intelligence, which together help foster responsible and successful children and adults. Louv goes on to explain that experiential education leads to higher test scores than students receiving traditional education and more dedicated students, as it did in schools around this country and others, such as Finland. He also argues that the implementation of experiential education results in lower rates of disciplinary referrals and suspensions from school because the children are engaged and feel as though they have a lot invested in their work at school and therefore do not wish to be absent from class-- even on senior-skip-day, Louv points out in his chapter. Louv goes on to discuss the environmental organizations that support experiential education, such as the Sierra Club but, points out that many of these organizations target children and young adults as a way to target their parents as opposed to focusing on the possible change the children themselves could create now, as well as in the future. Louv concluded the chapter with the argument that older adults are also academically stunted without experiential education as many scientists such as biologists have never actually witnessed the ecological systems their degrees are supposed to have focused on. The main points Louv is trying to communicate are that experiential learning is beneficial in almost every way in that it helps the students apply what they have learned in traditional settings (i.e. books) with the real world around them, as well as providing social and emotional benefits when the students work together to complete hands-on projects as well as providing something for the students to take pride and invest themselves in.

This chapter had a lot of merit and, as a whole, I vehemently agree that experiential education should be implemented in public schools around the nation because I agree with Louv that the benefits for the students is incalculable. However, I did have a few qualms with the chapter. Firstly, while experiential education is widely beneficial it is expensive. Yes, Louv argues that non-profit organizations are helping to financially back certain schools and others have a lot of involvement from the PTA or other such organizations to help fund experiential education but that is not possible in every school system in America. Inner-city school districts are notoriously underfunded and often have little to no parent/volunteer involvement so funding that way would not work in those schools. The other problem I encountered when reading this chapter was how little credit and attention he paid to those in higher education. While he did touch on how negatively traditional education is affecting some certain career fields, such as biology, he doesn't touch on what I consider to be one of the most important aspects of young adults-- they are the new generation of stake holders and decision makers. I understand the thinking that if you educate someone in a certain way when they're young, they are much more likely to continue in that way of thinking when they are older, but I think experiential education in college can catch some of the students that could not receive such an education in grade school and can change the priorities of those students and what they think makes someone a good citizen, which would be very influential in the decisions they make as an adult consumer.

Natural School Reform

Nigel Wilson

7 July 2014 Reading Response

Last Child in the Woods: 16 Natural School Reform

               In a chapter that reads more like a research paper than a narrative chapter, Richard Louv makes his point by summarizing a collection of statistical results from other studies.  He begins with attention to the work of John Dewey and Howard Gardener, two education theorists of high reputation who each in turn voiced the importance of hands on learning with non-abstracted systems. Louv then proposes that this kind of, I’m not sure if it’s liberal or hyper-conservative, educational paradigm that leaves behind box classrooms and embraces the true spirit of exploration physically and academically is becoming less popular and less feasible as legislature demands testable standards-based common curriculum nationwide.  He then points to the relaxed atmosphere and stunning success of Finland’s schools.  The chapter continues mostly with statistical remarks and indulges the reader with a few anecdotes including one about a class learning to garden and another about a class raising trout from egg through to wild release.  The article also cites increasing interest in ‘technology’ (a word that I feel is misused when it refers to all digital information technology and excludes all analog technology such as precise measuring tools and bicycles) as a drain on resources for naturalistic classes.

               As a child of the woods, a gardener, and an education major there was nothing in the chapter that I found surprising or disagreeable. Reading this article provided me with numbers to support what I was already quite sure of.  Some particular favorites I am sure I will like to use again either in a research paper or in conversation are:

“Environment-based education can surely be one of the cures to nature-deficit disorder.” I like the term nature-deficit disorder because it is a believable condition and it is curable. Whereas the term coined just as cheaply that it mimics, ADHD, I have a few problems with.  Three of the four words in it, deficit, hyperactivity, disorder, all put the blame squarely on the squirmy shoulders of the child diagnosed no matter how many times you say “It’s not your fault”.  I do not see that there needs to be any fault at all in our attention spans’ natural variance from person to person and topic to topic.  I see a dangerously unrealistic expectation: that an eight year old sit at a desk all day.  I am sure this is not natural or healthy for even an adult, much less an eight year old.

At Portland’s Environmental Middle School “96 percent of students meet or exceed state standards for math problem-solving – compared to only 65 percent of eighth graders at comparable middle schools.”

A ten year old student was quoted, “The problem I have with gardening is it’s not improving, not like technology, not like TVs and computers.  All these old wood gardening tools haven’t changed in decades.” Speaking like a true child of the twenty first century, he added, “Tools should improve.”  I liked this one because it gives a clear statement of what is probably a common critique today of something I love and lets me offer a pointed response.  What about technique? Shouldn’t it improve? And how can it when the tools keep setting technique progress back to zero?  Also, gardening is full of opportunities to innovate and improve methods which don’t destroy the ground they depend on.  New tools continue to be advertised as better than old ones but I tend to think that shovels have climaxed and I don’t think it’s a bad thing.  They do what they were intended to as simply and as well as possible.  New ways to dig keep being invented but most are complex and therefore prone to failure and they require combustible fuels.  It gets at the question- What does it mean to improve? In at least the aspects of simplicity, longevity, durability, technology is not improving. It is a cool experience to hold a tool in your hand that has climaxed in development; it could change but does not need to.  We could get more things and new things but we ought to recognize a goal before we set off down any path.

Natural School Reform

Daniel,

I think you bring up great points about our current education system. I would agree that for the majority of people the intention is not to establish critical thinking in our youth. I took a class called Contemporary Social Problems, in which we discussed our education system. In particular about the foundations of our system being based on the Prussian-Industrial system of education. The intention of this system is to track students in public education for menial labor and to enforce the hierarchical class structure through monotonous root learning, simple task completion, and division of children into rigid categories.

In my opinion, Louv’s proposal, however radical, can do no more harm to our children than what is already happening. If it can assist in some form of critical thinking then I’d say it is worth further examination to determine its effectiveness.

Also there is something that I think would be beneficial for our education system and that is to not think there is just one way of teaching. In the field of education reform, there are so many ideas to improve the system and everyone seems to be looking for the one magical solution to apply to every student. I think this is a flawed view because what works for most students might not work for the others. We should adopt a viewpoint of teaching to each and every student, this means finding what works for this one specific child and then applying a proposed beneficial method for educating that child. This might take multiple teachers in one classroom and allocating more resources to education, but shouldn’t we want whatever is best for humanity’s future no matter what the cost?

Natural School Reform

            Before reading Richard Louv’s chapter on natural school reform, I had never heard of the environment-based learning. I was raised in the dry structure of school. Often I was taught in windowless rooms. There was an emphasis on separating the student from distractions (windows, outside, etc.) and that would aid learning. To an extent I think it does the opposite. Creating this separation between school and outside life causes the boring school phenomenon. If students were taught outside and with a hands-on style, then schooling becomes more interesting to students and in turn they learn better.  

Wasn’t school supposed to be boring? With the research and example Louv presents it seems like there could be a better way. Environment-based learning has astounding effects on students' grades and enthusiasm. I agree that environment based learning could help fix the problem riddled education system of the United States.

            

           Louv also makes the point that universities and standard education produces narrow-minded masses. The United States education system seems to leave creativity out of the curriculum. Creativity is the backbone of problem solving. Education should breed good problem solvers because our world is full of problems.  

In my personal experience, I have learned a great deal in the school system without applying it to my ‘real’ life. The examples of environment-based education in this chapter make the link by teaching students about the same topics they would learn but applying those topics to their local environment. For example students may check pH of local streams in order to understand chemistry and how that pH effects aquatic life in order to understand biology. I think this is one of most important aspects of education, learning and then applying what you learned.

            

Natural School Reform

In the chapter Richard Louv describes the history of environment-based education. He goes on the describe systems in place in other countries, such as Finland, and also programs here in the United States. Richard argues that our country needs to move to a different model for educating our children and that experiential learning would be a great way to go. It offers the youth a chance to learn many of the classroom lessons out in nature with real world examples. He cites studies that indicate that students who participate in these types of programs are more likely to succeed in school and also face fewer disciplinary problems.

While I agree that experiential learning may be a great tool and a better way for children to learn, I don’t believe that there is currently a model out there that we could just simply adopt. I’m sure that the model that Finland uses works really well for them, but as the reading states it is a more homogenous country and on average more prosperous. One thing that I didn’t like about the educational system in Finland, is that there are no advanced classes. If a child excels in one area or with certain subject matter, why not allow them access to more advanced materials?

The system in Finland works for them because it’s a smaller country. In America, our system is meant to make sure that all children, from across the country, should learn the same information. In a country as large as ours, in terms of population and land mass, I’m not sure it’s possible for all children to learn the same information through experiential learning. With so many different regions, climates, and terrain features it would be hard to teach everyone the same information. While I do think that it would be great for kids in Florida to learn about swamps and for kids in Alaska to learn about glaciers, I’m not sure that those different places can teach children the same lessons.

Also, something the chapter doesn’t cover is the costs associated with making this kind of drastic change to our educational system. While I don’t believe that our system is achieving all of the goals that is was set to accomplish, there is no way to say that a different system would fare any better. There are some schools that are talked about in the chapter as success stories, but most of the examples are from affluent towns and cities. I wish that there were some examples from some more impoverished areas of the country. This would help us to get a better understanding of whether or not experiential learning can work across the country or just in these more well-off places.