By Ali Riley
Photo by Andrea Leopardi on Unsplash
Two thought-provoking presentations gave us all pause for thought - many of us (white Europeans and those educated in that tradition) believe we are working for a common good in embedding ESD in our teaching and our curricula, but we should ask ourselves questions about our default modes of thinking and approaching ESD:
- Whose perspectives are included?
- Which sources of information and ‘truth’ are we valuing above others?
- Which modes of education are prioritised?
Shweta Salvi and Andrew Reeves from De Montfort University presented an outline of the differences between colonial ‘mastery’ education (which can be seen as descriptive and transactional, preferring predictable outcomes, fixed meanings, categories and controlled narratives), and depth education (which recognises layers and interconnections, complexities and paradoxes, responsibilities and accountability, non-linear thinking, hindsight and foresight) (de Oliveira, 2021).
The concept of depth education was echoed in a later presentation by Paul Warwick from the University of Plymouth, who referenced David Orr’s Slow Knowledge (Orr, 1996), which leads to wisdom, not cleverness. The presenters propose an additional competency for ESD - the ability to recognise and address imbalances of power when issues are contested. This seems vital to begin the work of decolonising our ESD efforts - although one of the questions I had in my mind was how we build in the time and resources for depth education and slow learning a) within the constraints of the standard University programme, and b) at a time when fast solutions are needed. One to ponder further I think!
Saurav Roy from Loughborough University presented a case study from his teaching in packaging design, which neatly illustrated some of the above. In the UK, single-serve packaging is seen as an expendable convenience, wasteful and damaging to the environment. Mono-material packaging in larger sizes is seen as the optimal, most environmentally-friendly solution - and this is the perspective that would be passed on to students, with the best of intentions. However from an Indian perspective, single serve packaging is a vital financial management tool which allows households to access safe goods without requiring bulk capital, and mono materials do not fare well in the Indian climate. Imposing a Euro-centric solution in this different context is not likely to work. In most disciplines, similar case studies could be used to illustrate the danger of single-solution thinking to students.
"Are we teaching sustainability… or exporting the assumptions of wealthy economies?"
The presentations were a great reminder to ask reflective questions of our own practice whenever we incorporate ESD in our own curricula - are we doing more harm than good? As Saurav put it - ‘are we teaching sustainability… or exporting the assumptions of wealthy economies’?
If you would like to explore how to embed ESD in your teaching, a great first step would be to have a look at our Elevate pages on ESD. If you would like to discuss further, or request a workshop/talk in your school, then email us on elevate@sheffield.ac.uk.
de Oliveira, V.M. (2021) Hospicing Modernity. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.
Orr, D.W. (1996) ‘Slow Knowledge’, Conservation Biology, 10(3), pp. 699–702.
Ali Riley is an Academic Development Advisor in the Elevate Team.