Online Practice and Pedagogy: Rudsberg, K. and Ohman, J. (2010). Pluralism in practice - experiences from Swedish evaluation, school development and research.

Rudsberg, K. and Ohman, J. (2010). Pluralism in practice - experiences from Swedish evaluation, school development and research. Environmental Education Research, 16(1), pp. 95 - 111. Retrieved September 18, 2010 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135046209035040763

Introduction

Rudsberg and Ohman state that alternative methods of education practice are fast becoming the norm and caution against indoctrination. Education, they state, should be about diverse interests; promote and nurture individual opinions; actively encourage cognitive analysis; enhance competence and performance; and, be an holistic attribute of sustainable development.

This perspective forms the understanding Sweden has of environmental education and education for sustainable development. This study reviews national strategy of evaluative research and development from the perspective of schools, government agencies and researchers in other universities. Rudsberg and Ohman state that while research on participation, and group participation in detail is available, there are much fewer papers on how these methods translate in classrooms. In light of this, the authors have explored inclusion (pluralism in practice) in sustainable development based on observations of teaching practice and the capacity for individual sense-making in students. Rudsberg and Ohman based their argument on "an analytical concept called epistemological moves" (pg. 3).

National evaluation of environmental and sustainability education in Swedish schools

In 2000, the Swedish National Agency for Education was responsible for logging demographics on available environmental and sustainable development with a view to evaluate the potential for development. The report was based on the study of twenty four schools (i.e. range pre-school to upper secondary and adult) and included interviews from faculty members. The evaluation identified three traditions linked with environmental and sustainability:

fact based;
normative; and
pluralistic.

They varied in implementation and practice, and in their interpretation of a democratic education.

Environmental issues are accepted as the gap between knowledge and action in fact based tradition. Science is regarded as the definitive argument for sense-making, and it is in these models that students find reliable sources of information. Therefore opinion is based in fact, and provides the democratic basis for education.

Normative traditions support friendly transitions. Discourse is based on question and answer forums with civil servants and other experts to establish scientific transactive knowledge that result in artefacts (e.g. policy documents, curricula). Teaching consists of leading by example to instill values and behaviours that support fluctuating moods to maintain positive direction.

Pluralism is the metatheoretical incorporation of multi-level and transdimensional views, values and perspectives when responding to issues or questions on sustainability. The manner in which knowledge is acquired relies on deliberate discourse that is essential to continued balance and democracy is embedded in positive action. The primary function of education is seen to develop and enhance individual democratic skill.

Rudsberg and Ohman state that all three traditions are well represented in the country, with normative tradition at a popular 52% and fact based at 14%. Faculty who were interviewed stated that normative tradition is unable to reach today's children, and both faculty and students are doing less in environmental education than ever before. Core to this issue was the need to develop holistic teaching practice in order to remove obstacles (e.g. the time to consider a new strategy and its initiation.

The HUS project

The objective of the project was to design and develop models (i.e. best practice guidelines) that support the practice of ESD. Special task force groups were organised to represent geographical location, type, and subject matter. Leading the project were two project managers, four supervisors from teacher training, and two PhD students. Care was taken to ensure a flattened hierarchy that could be adapted to fit teaching practice. Teachers were assigned the task of documenting individual methods of ESD practice while receiving the support that was declared missing in the evaluation. Direct supervision facilitated collaboration (e.g. working hours reduced, seminars and lectures by experts were mandatory, communication networks established to discuss experience).

As conceptual understanding on sustainable development differs, the consequences are made visible through practice. Jabareen identifies seven hidden concepts that are ambiguous, contradictory and fraught with tension. Furthermore, Fergus and Rowney propose that the meaning has changed to represent the success of education as it correlates with economic worth rather than the integrated learning about values and diversity. Sumner suggests this is the basis for alternative methodology as it can be understood to mean academic imperialism as elitist, or education that makes collaboration about human commonwealth and cooperative practice. In conclusion he states that education can be seen as a top-down practice in order to sustain ideologies proscribing specific end objectives, the flip side of which is education through the democracy of sharing and critically evaluating opinions.

Rudsberg and Ohman conclude that if eduction could answer specifically, it would be detrimental to the development of democracy and suggest instead that education be the platform for diversity and conflict to reliably and critically examine the argument. The authors propose that sustainable development with allied with holistic pluralism. It is unreasonable to suggest that ESD is merely about environmental education as it relates to society and economic value as it provides an alternative perspective into the dimension of environmental development.

It was as the project developed that a specific interest in creating ways to enhance student capacity for analytical resolution emerged. Teaching practice was adapted to include active participation through student-centred learning and collaboration in addressing problems. Scientific investigation was needed to support empirical evidence (i.e. understanding why/how phenomena occurs). Rudsberg and Ohman recorded teacher understandings of stimulating inclusive meaning-making in students on ESD for analysis.

Epistemological moves

Rudsberg and Ohman base their analysis on John Dewey's pragmatism and Ludwig Wittgenstein's view on language. A similar study was undertaken by Ostman at the turn of the century. Epistemological moves clarifies the means by which a teacher understands how students acquire knowledge, or "the procedures of meaning-making" (pg. 6).

In order to investigate actions, it was thought necessary to be aware of intention. Framed by the concept is a hidden agenda presenting the notion that mind and reality are different. Researchers involved in detailed interviews requires teachers to think rationally and plan the sequence of events. Behaviour, and subsequently practice, is modified when conscious activity (i.e. strategy) is adapted to fit environment.

Dewey and Wittgenstein view the distinction of inner world and outer reality as the image individuals have of themselves from a third party perspective. To replace this picture, both scholars impress upon the need for accurate recall to remember how meaning, thoughts and emotions (i.e. inner mind) were integrated with language and action (i.e. outer reality) to build meaningful insight as to our feelings, desires and thoughts expressed in first person perspective.

Wittegenstein associates meaning from the term 'language game' to represent the flexibility of words as they are used from context to context or setting to setting. He proposes that thought or intention does not lie behind speech, but should be thought of as integrated or embedded in customs or rituals, and in context and situation.

From a first person perspective, intention can be interpreted as action. Action that facilitates sense making is termed 'epistemological moves' (e.g. giving instruction, giving and receiving constructive feedback) and are seen as guidelines for directed thought in students. Rudsberg and Ohman clearly categorise the use of the word function as it applies to activity and profession, and state that each action has a function as it relates to student sense-making.

Research design

Once the recordings of classroom activity had been captured, repeated analytical examination generated associations with context and relativity that stimulated specific focus or interest. Transcripts were detailed, and included written forms of gestures and facial expressions significant in tracing changes in conversation and how teacher utterances were significantly linked. Comparisons, coding and description identified modifications in behaviour and thus enabled the identification of epistemological moves. Evaluative criteria were judged on internal homogeneity and external heterogeneity.

Results

Generalising and specifying are two such epistemological moves that involves the teacher building a focus point for students to engage with (e.g. starts an open-ended discussion on sustainable development). Skillful maneuvering allow the teacher to retain control of the conversation by interjecting questions designed to give students direction to stay on topic. Generalising raises the discussion from personal experience to another level through the use of more general terms. Specifying requires the student to elaborate on opinions that were uttered at the beginning of the discussion. In talking through concepts, students find coherence in knowledge.

Actions derived from evaluative function create new perspectives that generate an opportunity to think of alternative solutions. Teachers encourage students to actively think by posing reflective questions. Rudsberg and Ohman's analysis establishes two categories of moves that have evaluative functions. Comparative and testing. Comparative moves are the addition of reflective questions posed by the teacher resulting in 'compare and evaluate' processes. Opposing opinion may emerge from the same source. Testing allows the teacher to depersonalise experience from student statements to fit a new situation. Inquiry exchanges test the conclusion in its new circumstance to verify validity.

Conclusions

Rudsberg and Ohman have facilitated in the study of individual teaching styles, and in individual teaching styles related to student sense-making. The authors were able to categorise four epistemological moves - generalising, specifying, comparative and testing, that make up the attributes and function of interaction in classrooms.

Rudsberg and Ohman state that the terms generalising and specifying are not specifically viewed as pluralist practice. However, by allowing students to revisit topics and explore opinion further, internal philosophy is developed providing a clearer idea of public shared view.

Pluralism is accounted for when generalising and specifying moves are combined with comparative and testing moves that serve as evaluative functions. Student contribution can be nurtured and developed. Diversity of opinion creates an awareness in the student that there is more than one perspective. Internal evaluations occur. Munby and Roberts identify this form of pedagogy as socialisation towards intellectual independence. Stimulation comes from divergent standpoints where none is supreme. Rudsberg and Ohman states that discussions are open-ended "even though it follows specific rules for the correct way of creating meaning, or, in other words, how to participate in a pluralistic act of communication about value-related sustainable issues" (pg. 13). They reason that how we learn is also what we learn where process is part of content. The authors proposed that educational practice has the potential for modelling a democratic way of living.

Ideologies of democracy are supported in communication and attitude through influence rather than through defensiveness of preconceived ideas. Situations where new meanings emerge encourage pluralist practice and sustain democratic communication. Delivery of education is important to sense-making as a constant restructuring of knowledge forms the context of democracy. Communication is used as a tool to pull on deeper cognitive capacity that requires active participation.

Final remarks

Rudsberg and Ohman present their paper as an example of pragmatism that has been developed within Swedish research to highlight the pragmatic approach and methodology for epistemological moves. The system of analysis portrays a future vision of pluralism in ESD as pluralist practice not only supports the principle policy, it is embedded within the tools used in teaching practice to stimulate specific focus sense-making. Democracy is embedded in curricula as a means to adopt a wider view of environmental education, and build a more meaningful perspective of life without indoctrination.

Rudsberg and Ohman remind us that pluralism is also connected to enlightenment and the development of liberalism and the humanities. ESD has developed in so many ways that are peculiar to the host through either cultural or historical events, that it would be unwise to suggest a specific form of pluralist practice.