Quakers, Education, and the Question of Sustainability

From WildWiki

Plenary Speech Given at the Friends Association of Higher Education Conference, June 2007 and published in Quaker Higher Education, Spring, 2009.

Jay Roberts Asst. Prof. of Education Earlham College

INTRODUCTION

The United Nations has declared the period 2005-2015 as the decade for Education for Sustainable Development. Clearly, within the last five years, we have seen a fast and remarkable turn toward issues of climate change and sustainability within the United States. Seemingly, everyone is thinking about it, discussing ways forward, and (maybe) willing to commit to serious action. Amidst all of this dusty stampeding however, there remains little to no talk about the role of education and schooling in either the problem or imagining potential solutions. This is curious. Surely, the cumulative experiences of sixteen to twenty years of schooling ought to have a profound influence (negatively or positively) on our relationship to the natural world? Indeed, many progressive educators have made the point that schooling is not neutral. Educator and critical theorist Henry Giroux is famous for saying that “the political is pedagogical and the pedagogical is political.” The seeming neutrality of the college canon was questioned in earlier decades by the rise of Women’s Studies and African-American Studies to name two of the more notable challenges. David Orr, perhaps our most noted thinker on issues of education and the environment, has noted: “It is a matter of no small consequence that the only people who have lived sustainably on the planet for any length of time could not read, or, like the Amish do not make a fetish out of reading. My point is simply that education is no guarantee of decency, prudence, or wisdom. More of the same kind of education will only compound our problems…. It is not education, but education of a certain kind, that will save us.”

Whether or not one may agree that schools are part of the problem, it is worth asking ourselves as Friends: What does it mean to take a Quaker approach to education for sustainability? We believe that peace, for example, ought to become a central part of both the content and method of teaching. This is played out in many ways within Friends schools- the informality of student-teacher relationships, the unique approach to conflict resolution, the coverage of social justice topics within the curriculum, and the progressive orientation to addressing real, community-based problems. Are we in a time, now, where a similar approach ought to be taken for issues of sustainability in both K-12 and higher education?

I think this query ought to apply both to ourselves as individuals aligned in some fashion with the religious Society of Friends. And, importantly, I think it also ought to apply to Quaker institutions of learning and, in particular, higher education. Why? While it is vital that we, as individuals, work through our own leadings as it relates to being in integrity with the natural world, it is just as crucial that our public personae- our schools, also do this form of institutional “inner work.” It would seem silly if we asked our students to “act peacefully” if our institutions did not attempt to do likewise in all areas within their responsibility. This explains why, at Earlham for example, we are mindful of our investments and have a committee who is charged with monitoring how our institutional values remain in integrity with the companies that we invest in.

To this end (and with apologies for the somewhat cheesy model), I offer what I have tentatively described as “The Five C’s of Quaker Education for Sustainability.” What follows below is, I hope, just the beginning of a deeper and more sustained look at both the role of schooling within the issue of sustainability and the voice that the Religious Society of Friends might bring to the table.

THE FIVE C’S OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY

I see at least five areas that provide a unique and distinctly Quaker approach to the problem of education for sustainability. Any such attempt ought to be:

1. Comprehensive

2. Contemplative

3. Consensus-oriented

4. Critical

5. Connective

Comprehensive

There are likely other areas and good people will disagree. My point here is to begin to open up space for the conversation to take place. First, our responses to the current environmental challenges before us (importantly, this goes beyond “climate change” to a much more broad intersection of areas of ecological justice including basic needs, quality of life standards, equity issues, etc.) must be comprehensive. That is to say, we cannot adequately address the issue by simply tacking on a required general education course, or by simply signing on to the Talloise agreement (those these actions may well be good ideas to pursue). Friends have long advocated for deeper assessments of causes and effects. Indeed, such an approach forms the cornerstone of our witness for peace and stance against acts of war. Thus, we must approach the issue of sustainability broadly and deeply by examining the ways a sustainability stance in education affects the curriculum, the co-curriculum, the mission, and the community (both inside and outside of the school). This moves us beyond education “about” sustainability” to a place where sustainability becomes something that is “lived out” through all the elements of the institution. Thus, it becomes more of an ideal than a checkbox of behaviors that must be constantly re-interpreted and deliberated upon by the community as it wrestles with the tensions of what it means to “live sustainably.” In many ways, this mirrors what many educational theorists have argued about democracy- that, within the realm of schooling, it ought to be viewed as an active “way of life” and not a passive birthright.

Contemplative

In addition to being comprehensive, a Quaker approach to education for sustainability ought to be contemplative. Environmental problems are, by definition, human problems. A commonality among many environmental writers and thinkers, from Arne Naes to Rachel Carson, Aldo Leopold to Vandana Shiva, is that environmental problems arise from a failure of contemplation and thoughtfulness. This can range from scientific notions of mindfulness (Leopold’s “pedagogy of place” or Carson’s oft quoted caution that “before we think whether we can do something, we ought to think whether we should”) to spiritual and aesthetic constructions (Thoreau’s transcendentalism or Buber’s “I:Thou” relationship). A Quaker approach to sustainability would amplify the importance of contemplation and thoughtfulness to both our theory and our practice. As John Ralston Saul once said: "But is the nature of civilization “speed”? Or is it ‘consideration’? Any animal can rush around a corral four times a day. Only a human being can consciously oblige himself to go slowly in order to consider whether or not he is doing the right thing, doing it the right way, or ought to be doing something else… Speed and efficiency are not in themselves signs of intelligence or capability or correctness."

Parker Palmer also once remarked during a speech at Earlham College that modern colleges and universities resemble the hum and whir of “munitions factories” rather than places of contemplation and scholarship. I once heard a colleague talk of how students these days are subjected to a “brutal pace” and “bombarded with information.” How fast we normalize the logics of the market and the military into the language of school! Quakers have long demonstrated the case that long and sustained focus on a particular issue yields great results, if one is only patient enough and willing to plant a seed without the benefit of witnessing it bear fruit. But, I think we can do better here, as Friends. To what extent are we (either as individuals or institutions) a shining example of simplicity, contemplation, and the virtue of slowness to the rest of the world? Thomas Merton once chided the stressed and overworked advocates for peace in the world by saying “busyness itself is a form of violence.” I wonder if we have done enough to demonstrate to the world how “peace begins with me” when we seem to be as focused on production, efficiency, and speed as everyone else seems to be. It may require us to re-consider how we, as Friends, are orchestrating educational environments for the students in our care. When we are busy we cannot nurture our spirits, we have a harder time being contemplative and, as a consequence, I believe our students simply “model our model.” In the end, this may contribute to the objectification of the natural world. There is a difference between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. What do we wish to promote and practice? Changing inward institutional culture at this level would be difficult and challenging work. While we all may agree on the surface that “less is more.” How many of us, when pressed, would agree to eliminate assignments, class-time, courses, or even departments in the name of “inner-sustainability”? I believe this is, perhaps, our most important task as Quaker educators. Can we find the resolve to alter the unconscious and consumptive wheels of “progress”?

Consensus Oriented

Another aspect of a Quaker approach to education for sustainability would utilize a perceived weakness to strategic advantage. As climate change becomes increasingly apparent, many talk of the need for quick and resolute action. However, fast and determined leadership is not necessarily appropriate leadership. I am reminded here of a political cartoon I recently saw that included a group of lemmings lined up to jump off a cliff. As one of the lemmings was preparing to jump, he turns around and says to the lemming behind him, “don’t you just love resolute and determined leadership?” The Quaker process of consensus may not yield efficient results, but in a crisis-oriented climate, as we seem to be in now, it has distinct advantages. First, by taking the time to deliberate and examine the issue from many perspectives and listening to all voices, we may be better able to get at root causes and issues as opposed to simply dealing with the symptoms. This is what Peter Senge calls “second loop” thinking. In single loop analysis, we move from doing to observing to reflecting and finally deciding. This is technical or action-oriented thinking and it is the predominant way most organizations operate, at least in the West. Second loop thinking involves pausing at the reflection stage and sinking deeper through the process of re-considering, re-connecting, and re-framing which leads you back to reflecting and then on to deciding and doing. The problem with single loop thinking is that it has the tendency to focus on technical solutions without more carefully examining the assumptions and ideologies that generated the problem in the first place. Quaker process, done well, brings the community down to the second loop, and ensures that possible ways forward have adequately considered both root causes and possible consequences. Second, it has the potential to bring the community together in purposeful and agreed upon action that itself is far more “sustainable” than committee recommendations, presidential declarations, and the like. This “bottom-up” approach is the hallmark of much of community activism and is well suited for the kind of culture change necessary for sustainability to become more than a label or shallow and technically driven enterprise on campuses.

Critical

Fourth, a Quaker approach to education for sustainability should have a decidedly critical orientation. I am choosing to use the term “critical” here to denote the importance of social justice related work both within the Quaker faith and as a growing area within the sustainability and environmental movements. In a well-read parable of the New Testament, Jesus tells the story of the sheppard who, when just one of his flock goes astray, leaves the rest to go and tend to his one wayward animal. Friends have often interpreted this passage as a metaphor for being attentive to those at the margins of society- the poor, the excluded, the discriminated upon, and even the perceived “villains.” The current “environmental movement” (whatever that is) has often been critiqued for its elitist and privileged status, and perhaps, rightly so. Any casual observer would point out that activists tend to be white, middle to upper-class, well-educated, and located in the northern hemisphere. These folks, with their “full stomachs” and comfortable standard of living are quick, so the argument goes, to tell everyone else to stop consuming so much. Indeed, a recent highly publicized essay (now a book) by Earlham College graduate Michael Shellenberger and Ted Norhaus provocatively titled “The Death of Environmentalism” takes the movement to task for its anti-capitalistic, anti-progress, foundations. But I think we need not throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. The rise of “eco-justice” and the synergies between ecological concerns and social justice concerns creates new terrain for re-articulating environmental concerns as the concerns of those from the margins. In many ways Hurricane Katrina was as much about ecology as it was about race and class. The world over, it is the destitute and the unseen who live at the ecological margins- in the floodplains, near industrial waste sites, on dry and infertile land. Quakers, with our longstanding work on behalf of those society has chosen to ignore are well-positioned to work toward re-articulating sustainability as a social justice concern. In the words of Vandana Shiva: "On the streets of Seattle and Cancun, in homes and farms across the world, another human future is born, a future based on inclusion, not exclusion; on nonviolence, not violence; on reclaiming the commons, not their enclosure; on freely sharing the earth’s resources, not monopolizing and privatizing them."

We build this road by traveling it. Friends know this work, it only will take focus, commitment, and a willingness to re-think what education and schooling is for.

Connected

A final aspect of a Quaker approach to education for sustainability, would involve connectivity- the conscious and deliberate interplay between “faith and works.” Here I am reminded of the old Quaker saw about a new attender to Quaker meeting who, after several uncomfortable minutes of silence turns to an elder to his right and says, “excuse me sir, but when does the service begin?” The elder replies, “we are worshipping now, the service comes after.” The connection between faith and works in certainly part of all Christian denominations as well as many, if not all, world religions. But, Friends do place an unusually strong emphasis on “letting your life speak.” George Fox himself once said that he wished “to know God experimentally.” If he had had the word available to him at the time, I wonder if he might have said that he wished to know God “experientially”? Experiential education, at its root, is about the connectivity between theory and practice or, in religion, between faith and works. As Friends, we learn to place great weight on our actions in the world. This is particularly true within schooling as we adhere to value statements such as “knowledge has moral consequence.” This form of praxis is geared toward both personal and societal transformation. Thus, education toward sustainability from a Quaker standpoint would emphasize an experiential understanding of our current and future environmental challenges. For example, to what degree are our students active participants in both problem generation and problem solution in regards to education for sustainability? Are we expecting them to merely learn about it in the classroom? What opportunities exist for student-faculty connectivity beyond the usual classroom-based research projects? In the words of German educator and founder of Outward Bound Kurt Hahn, “we must give students the freedom and the power to wreck the State. Only then will they understand the responsibilities of citizenship.” Experiential connection also goes beyond education “about sustainability,” enabling students to “ground truth” content against what they see, hear, and experience either on their own or in a group. It taps into the affective domain, with the understanding that true learning is not merely a cognitive exercise. When students and their teachers connect emotionally, viscerally, with nature, the marginalized, the community, each other, it becomes much more difficult to objectify and to remain aloof, cynical, and indifferent to the plights of others and our natural world. In 1976, the educational anthropologist Dorothy Lee gave a speech where she worried aloud about an overemphasis on literacy, on words (or, for our purposes on the word “sustainability” at the expense of the experience of it). She said: "Are we paying a heavy price for literacy? Are we giving up our heritage of wonder, of curiosity, of questing, of plunging into chaos and creating life out of it? Are we giving up our sense of mystery, the excitement of being lost in ambiguity and building a world out of it? Have we given up this heritage for the sake of literacy, which gives us a label instead of experience?"

A Quaker approach to education for sustainability would be constantly vigilant that we do not replace experiences with labels and that our students, side by side with our faculty, connect theory and practice, faith and works, that we come to know sustainability “experimentally.”

CONCLUSION

In the end, learning about our environmental problems and their causes can be a depressing and energy-sapping process. With all the apparent “sickness” that is around, it can be easy to develop a cynical or weary attitude (which fish am I allowed to order at a restaurant again?). George Fox famously reminds us all to “walk cheerfully over the earth answering that of God in everyone.” Perhaps the “cheerfully” part might be a sixth “C” of Quaker education for sustainability. This can be a struggle even in good times. But the power of a faith, to me, lies in its ability to, in the words of Maxine Greene, “imagine how things might be otherwise.” Even if the end-goal of sustainability is not a fixed destination (which I do not think it is) but rather a constantly receding horizon that gives us a direction to travel, a sense that there is good work to be done. It is faith that allows me to go forth on that path joyfully, even in the face of so much sorrow and worry. As Friends, we seem more comfortable with the idea of holding things in “tension” and working with ambiguity. It is another one of our perceived weaknesses that is, to me, a great strength. Education for sustainability must, in the end, be about holding things in tension, dealing with conflicting values, ambiguous goals, and multiple contexts. Rather than lamenting this state of affairs, we Friends can celebrate it and, in turn, find a certain strength in our distinctiveness that may shine a light to the rest of the world. May we always strive to live out the questions. Wendell Berry perhaps says it best:

It may be that when we no longer know what to do

We have come to our real work

And that when we no longer know which way to go

We have come to our real journey.

The mind that is not baffled is not employed.

The impeded stream is the one that sings.

Resources for those wishing to read further in issues of sustainability, environment, and education

Bowers, C.A. (1997). The Culture of Denial: Why the Environmental Movement Needs A Strategy for Reforming Universities and Public Schools One of the more cited, sustained, criticisms of the role of education in our current environmental crisis.

Bonnett, Michael (2004). Retrieving Nature: Education for a Post-Humanist Age A nice treatment of the philosophy of environmental education with a particular argument toward pulling back from post-modern and post-structural critiques of environmentalism.

Heiffetz, Ronald (1994). Leadership Without Easy Answers One of the best texts (in my opinion) dealing with the topic of leadership and leadership theory. While Heiffetz does not deal with issues of sustainability directly (though he does refer to them), his notion of “Adaptive Leadership” is very “Quaker-esque” and I see it as an excellent model for environmental problem solving.

Noddings, Nel, ed. (2005) Educating for Global Citizenship Noddings is a well-known philosopher of education. While this edited volume is not her best work, she deals specifically with issues of globalization and sustainability in the chapter, “Place-Based Education to Preserve the Earth and Its People.”

Orion Magazine. If you haven’t heard of it and you like (progressive) intersections between nature, culture, and society it is worth checking out (no ads!). Many prominent environmental writers are featured including Barbara Kingsolver, Wendell Berry, Terry Tempest Williams, Gary Nabhan, etc.

Orr, David (1994). Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect An environmental education classic, particularly the first chapter, “What Is Education For?” which can also be found on-line with a simple Google search.

Orr, David (2002). The Nature of Design: Ecology, Culture, and Human Intention One of Orr’s best works, in my opinion, in terms of its trans-disciplinary focus and the creativity of the ideas presented.

Capra, Fitjof (2002). The Hidden Connections: A Science for Sustainable Living. (see also his website: Center for Ecoliteracy) An interesting read from a world-renowned physicist as he makes the argument that in order to sustain life the principles underlying our social institutions must be consistent with the broader organization of nature.

Shiva, Vandana (2005). Earth Democracy: Justice, Sustainability, and Peace Another well-known environmental writer from India. While perhaps not as rigorous as some might prefer, it is a nice treatment of the topic from a developing world perspective.

Sobel, David (. Place Based Education: Connecting Classrooms and Communities A bit more K-12 in emphasis but, nonetheless, the best resource on this growing pedagogy which pushes beyond more traditional “environmental education” to incorporate service learning and curriculum integration into a holistic model for schooling. Nice on practice and specifics.

Websites:

http://www.focusthenation.org/main.php A group focused on getting college and university campuses to focus on Climate Change for one day in Jan. of 2008. Creative, energetic, and (refreshingly) focused on student voice

http://www.inspiredprotagonist.com/blog/evangelicals_for_the_environment A blog focused on issues of environment from an evangelical Christianity viewpoint

http://www.livingwitness.org.uk/index.htm A British Quaker group focused on environmental concerns

http://www.ecoliteracy.org/ Fritjof Capra’s organization- a bit more K-12 oriented but with a few nice downloadable resources.

http://www.aashe.org/ The Association for the Advancement of Sustainability on Higher Education