Mittuniversitetet

Modern Western education has been criticised for its human-centred orientation and for legitimising the exploitation of nature, thereby contributing to the environmental crisis. This article responds by rethinking a specific Northern European strand of the Bildung tradition, namely the modern critical-constructive approach associated with Humboldt and Klafki, as a pedagogical framework concerned with how teaching and educational practices could and should support processes of self-formation. Drawing on reflections from an international Wild Pedagogies (WP) gathering in Sweden, we engage the WP concept of Nature as Co-Teacher to develop three re-imaginations of critical-constructive approaches to Bildung. First, we reimagine Bildung as dialogical co-development in a more-than-human world. Second, we reimagine Bildung as place-specific pedagogical practices oriented towards engagement with, in, and for the living world. Third, we reimagine Bildung within a nature-, place-, and life-centred horizon in which the living world provides the highest context of meaning and value. Together, these re-imaginations contribute to ongoing debates in Environmental and Sustainability Education and related fields about how pedagogical traditions can respond to the challenges of the Anthropocene.

This presentation builds on the assumptions that today's crises, be they environmental, social or political (e.g., the failing confidence in democracy), need to be, and would benefit from being, confronted together (Orr, 2024). With education as a necessary partner in this eco-social-cultural change work (Fettes & Blenkinsop, 2023) and the desire to enable eco-democracy in practice (Blenkinsop & Wilhelmsson, 2025), we draw on research recently done at an outdoor school in Canada. Our focus here will be on how location, curriculum, and various ‘media’ considerations interact to ‘help or hinder’ the project. We start with a brief overview of the eco-school itself. Then we move to a description of our method, narrative inquiry (Clandinin, Pushor, & Orr, 2007). This research followed a single teacher of grades 1-2 over the course of several weeks, through various teaching and learning locations. We then present the findings, drawn from observational and interview-based data, but with a theoretical twist. This is because our analysis has been aided by a theoretical frame and thought-provoking heuristic that rests on the work of media theorist Harold Innes (1950) and outdoor educator/theorist Devin Mustic. The presentation will end with a shared discussion about the possibilities and implications of this ‘theory of media’ and its significance for outdoor educators and researchers who are interested in the ideas of both eco-democracy andeco-social-cultural change.

References:

Blenkinsop, S. & Wilhelmsson, L. (2025). In search of eco-democracy: education for mutually beneficial flourishing.Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 41 (2), 325-337.Clandinin, D. J., Pushor, D., & Orr, A. (2007). Navigating sites for narrative inquiry. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1),21–38.Fettes, M., & Blenkinsop, S. (2023). Education as practice of eco-social-cultural change. Palgrave-MacMillan.Innis, Harold. (1950) Empire and communications. Oxford UniversityOrr, D. W. (2024). The missing politics in environmental education, revisited. Australian Journal of EnvironmentalEducation, 40(3), 382–389.

We live in an uncertain time - with environmental destruction and injustices and at same time the same time, challenged and questioned institutions and norms of democracy (cf. Haraway, 2016; Orr, 2024; Peters, 2017; Pickering et al. challenged and questioned institutions and norms of democracy (cf. Haraway, 2016; Orr, 2024; Peters, 2017; Pickering et.al, 2020; Stengers, 2015, 2018, 2023). Hence, there is an urgent need to rethink living and learning democracy in education, maybe even rewilding democracy, if being able to seriously question status quo and business as usual in research and society. We promote education as a partner for change (Blenkinsop & Kuchta, 2024; Fettes & Blenkinsop, 2023) and, thereby, how education could contribute to exploring the meaning of eco-democracy. 

Consequently, eco-democracy acknowledges an ecocentric worldview and an intrinsic value for all humans and the more-than-human and strives towards mutually beneficial flourishing (Blenkinsop & Wilhelmsson, in press; Clark, 2017). Challenging democracy as solely a human endeavour, the main interest is understanding how eco-democracy could be lived, learned, and enacted through relational and emergent interactions between humans and the more-than-human world. 

Concerning a planned project with young students, our presentation aims to elaborate on the methodological implications of activating human and more-than-human encounters in teaching practice. Theoretically, we draw on post-human theorising (Malone, Truong & Gray, 2017); where human and more-than-human agencies emerge through encounters and relationships (Stengers, 2010). More specifically, we are inspired by the Wild Pedagogies tradition and ‘nature as co-teacher’ one of 8 touchstones that seek to amplify the voices of the more-than-human world and their educational significance (Jickling et al., 2018; Morse et al., 2018). Eco-portraiture will contribute as it offers tools for interpretation within a geographical place, including more-than-human perspectives, allowing aesthetic and underscoring ethical aspects (Blenkinsop et al., 2022). 

Methodologically, exploring living and learning eco-democracy in education through young students' relationships with more than humans inevitably captures the intricate entanglements of more-than- human students, researchers, and teachers' power relations and response-abilities. The contribution of our presentation will be discussing opportunities and pitfalls when trying to stay with the messiness and openness in entanglements without not turning a blind eye to power relations when aiming at letting all voices be heard. 

1. Research topic 

This paper is part of an ongoing research interest within educational contexts concerning the concept and phenomenon of eco-democracy. The interest stems from the assumption that humans and the more-than-humans, are confronted with ongoing intertwined crises, such as environmental destruction and a lack of confidence in democracy. Furthermore, ecological crises and their consequences are foremost political crises (Orr, 2024) tightly connected with injustice (Martusewicz, 2020). 

While understanding education as a necessary partner for change, education needs to capture tensions arising concerning political dimensions and normativity (Fettes & Blenkinsop, 2023). However, as both ecology and democracy build on refined concepts and links between them are changeable (Peters, 2017) how they merge educationally is of interest. Consequently, the educational approach to environmental education which we propose aims to explore how nature as co-teacher could widen students' perspectives of eco-democracy. 

2. Theoretical framework  

Our thinking is inspired by Wild Pedagogies and the formulated six touchstones as tools to support hope for the future. One of them, Nature as co-teacher, provides a focus on how the more-than-human-world could be actively included in teaching practices (Jickling et al, 2018).  Furthermore, the concept of Wilderness, as wildness, and self-willed land, is important as it provides a focus on how humans and more-than-humans can live and dwell together (Morse et al., 2018). Eco-democracy presupposes an ecocentric worldview where the more-than-humans have intrinsic value and affect democratic processes, which could be enacted through four value commitments, voice, consent, self-determination, and kindness (Blenkinsop & Wilhelmsson, forthcoming).   

3. Methodology  

The research design builds on qualitative exploratory methodology where the empirical data are co-produced in collaboration with students aged 7-12, and the more-than-human. Activities include discussions on eco-democracy and creative expressions using various materials. Follow-up interviews with teachers and students provide additional data. The produced material will be analyzed and created into eco-portraitures (Blenkinsop et al., 2022). Eco-portraiture offers a creative five-step analysis and interpretations within a geographical place that concerns aesthetic and ethical aspects and acknowledges more-than-human perspectives.

4. Expected findings  

This paper contributes by firstly, giving insights on how democracy vis-a-vis environmental crises and injustice practices could be understood through young students and more-than-human relations. Secondly, the study reveals the complexity of students' voices in environmental education, intricately connected with power relations among children, between teachers and students, and between humans and more-than-humans.

5. Relevance to Nordic educational research    

Our research has relevance for the Nordic countries with a tradition concerning democratic education. More specifically for rural northern areas, where sustainability development challenges are complex and pinpoint norms, values, and conditions for living and staying in sparsely populated areas (Kronlid & Wilhelmsson, 2024). Furthermore, our research contributes to introducing one of Wild Pedagogies touchstones as a methodological approach to environmental education.  

This paper begins with crises; environmental, social and democratic. And then it posits that in the midst of these crises there might be an opportunity. One that involves not so much "saving"democracy and sustaining current ways of life but shifting attentions towards potentially creating (re-creating) something different. Something we are calling eco-democracy. There have long been voices, calling for a more environmentally thoughtful form of democracy. After tracing a short discussion of this history including some of the critiques we turn to an exploration of eco-democracy in environmental education. Our argument is that some forms of environmental education are already thinking in more eco-democratic ways without necessarily naming the project as such. In order to do this, we focus on five 'seedlings' of eco-democracy that already exist in environmental education. These seedlings allow us to do two things. First, draw connections to Wild Pedagogies and second draw out four key considerations for environmental educators if they are interested in having more eco-democratic practices: voice, consent, self-determination and kindness. The paper ends with a short speculative exploration of what might happen pedagogically if environmental education were to assume an eco-democratic orientation through honouring voice, consent, self-determination, and kindness. 

Syftet med att publicera den här texten i Utbildningsvetenskapliga studier är att presentera projektet och de viktigaste tentativa resultaten. Rapporten har författats baserat på dialoger med medverkande pedagoger medan forskarna hållit i pennan. Undervisningsexemplen är skrivna av pedagogerna själva. Målgruppen är lärarstudenter, verksamma lärare, pedagogiska ledare lärarutbildare, andra forskare inomfältet utbildning för hållbar utveckling och alla som har intresse för praktiknära forskning inom pedagogik och didaktik. Rapporten skulle kunna användas som underlag för vidare forskning, som utgångspunkt för reflektion i högre utbildning och i grundskolans praktik samt som utgångspunkt för reflektion i fortbildning av yrkesverksamma lärare om undervisning och utbildning för hållbar utveckling i gles- och landsbygdsskolor. Författare är David Kronlid och Linda Wilhelmsson. Kronlid är docent i etik vid Uppsala universitet och Lektor i pedagogik vid Mittuniversitetet. Kronlid har arbetat med högre utbildning, lärarfortbildning och forskning om utbildning för hållbar utveckling sedan slutet av 1990-talet. Kronlids forskningsintressen är etik, värdegrund, klimaträttvisa och bedömning. Wilhelmsson är lektor i pedagogik vid Mittuniversitetet och har forskat om demokratiska aspekter av undervisning och utbildning. På senare tid har Wilhelmsson engagerat sig i demokratiska frågor i miljö- och hållbarhetsutbildning samt metodologiska frågor i pedagogisk och didaktisk forskning. Wilhelmssons forskningsintressen är ekodemokrati, bildning och didaktisk praktiknära forskning. Författarna ansvarar för de resonemang och slutsatser som förs fram i rapporten.

The main aim of this paper is to identify and discuss students' and neighboring local actor’s joint value construction within a nature-local actor-student relational matrix.

Considering present eco-social-cultural challenges (Fettes & Blenkinsop, 2023) and planetary boundaries (Oziewicz, 2022) the construction of epistemic and ethical values is key for education as social leverage for a sustainable future (Jickling et. al 2018). It is crucial to understand the practical processes involved in this effect. Hence, scrutinizing how students, nature and local actors collaborate in value construction within the context of ESE is key. Drawing on results from a practice-based research project with three small schools in sparsely populated areas in the middle of Sweden, the paper addresses ESE at the crossroads of formal education and social learning.

Theoretical Framework

The paper draws on insights from theorizing the question of the interdependence between epistemic and ethical values in moral philosophy (Norton & Norton 2007, Dewey 1944), pedagogical research (Östman & Almqvist, 2010), and environmental ethics research (Rolston III, 1987). The paper focuses on interactions between students, neighboring local actors, and nature as partners(Merchant 1996) and addresses an empirical question focusing on value-construction in particular socio-geographical locations. The paper also builds on categorial Bildung-theory and critical constructive didactics (Klafki, 2010) 

Methodology/Research Design

The study design is abductive (Wilhelmsson & Damber, 2022), which enables flexible choices of theoretical framework to avoid one-sided analysis and uncritical explanations to study, understand, and explain the construction of epistemic and ethical values in complex ESE practices. Practitioner inquiry is used as methodology enabling teaching as the place of investigation (see Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). Finally, an environmental ethical conceptual framework for empirical research on ESE (Kronlid & Öhman 2012) is used. The empirical material are teacher’s reflexive texts and interview transcripts. 

Expected Results/Findings:

The research questions are: What epistemic and ethical values are constructed in the socio-geographical location of rural schools? How are epistemic and ethical values constructed in collaboration between local actors, students, and nature? To what extent do such values enable constructive critique of the intrinsic – instrumental value dichotomy in environmental ethics and ESE research. Expected findings are insights into (a) how socio-geographical locations are engaged in value construction, (b) which values that are being constructed, and (c) how formal ESE and social learning interact in a local actor-student-nature relational matrix.

Relevance to Nordic Educational Research

Research that focuses on small schools in sparsely populated communities is uncommon. Research concerning the potential of the local natural environment as an equally important partner in education is scarce. Finally, interdisciplinary research combining ESE, environmental ethics and philosophy of education are expected to produce results that are specific for the Nordic context.