|
|
                
|
Lead Papers Opening Remark by Leader
Dr. Alexander S. Bogolyubov has described the "Ecosystem", all-Russian Environmental Educational Association, started its work in 1995. Its Educational Center helps to reach the goals of environmental education through field ecology. "Ecosystem" was founded by a group of young biologists and educators, the former participants of the biological school group of the state Darwin Museum in Moscow. They had been filled with the ideas of the young naturalist movement and had worked out a unique experience of the traditional Russian environmental field education. The main activity of "Ecosystem" is an introduction of outdoor ideology and approach into the environmental education, emphasizing children's involvement with concrete research work and nature conservation through different types of outdoor activities. Nowadays "Ecosystem" is an instructive-methodical center for the environmental education of school-children. It is oriented to work with Moscow city schools, institutions of the additional education and public environmental organizations all over the Russia that teach children ecology in natural settings. "Ecosystem" works with Moscow school-students and teachers, school-teachers associations and biological school groups, leaders and members of youth public environment organizations, with educators and different staff categories from the additional education system, biology and geography scientists who use the principles and approaches of the outdoor ecology in their activity from all Russian regions. For the years of our activity we have achieved much. Since 1996 many instructive books on outdoor ecology have been published for school-teachers and teachers of the additional education. Forty methodical manuals have been published by autumn, 1998. First in Russia we developed a Resource Book for Environmental Education for children. Among the instructive events in 1995-2000 we can mention 15 conferences, seminars, courses for educators, over 30 field camps for young Russian ecologists, more than 200 field practices for Moscow schools. In 2000-01 we are going to publish a book "The Field Studies Practices for school students of 5th - 10th grades" that will include a set of videos that summarizes the "Ecosystem's" experience in teaching outdoor environment practices for Moscow schoolchildren. Our Teaching Philosophy Teaching young ecologists and their leaders concrete ways of research and nature conservation in natural conditions is the essence and basis of all "Ecosystem" Center events. Our published manuals, field exercises, conferences, seminars, and teaching courses are directed to mastering up-to-date approaches in field ecology and the ways of the environment research by the participants of the Russian environment and young naturalist movement. We don't teach to play ecology and "to ecologize one's soul". We teach to take a zooplankton samples, to measure the pollution, to describe vegetation, to count birds and mammals and how to do these with children. In this case "one's soul ecologizes itself". We consider adopting and spreading such an approach in education throughout the country to be the most important our mission for the future. We would like to see every child in Russia to be able to contact with and "research" real wild nature at least once or twice during his/her school years. And that is why we organize outdoor practical work for Moscow schools. We take schoolchildren of the city public schools to outdoor field practices for 3-4 days of their school-time. We aim at revealing before urban children the main objective of natural ecosystems' dynamics and functioning in different seasons. We feel that introduction of outdoor research practices into school education is necessary, because the information contained in the school textbooks is insufficient. Moreover, we believe that it is impossible to teach biology, geography and ecology remote from the living nature. What is the essence and importance of the "naturalistic" approach and why it is useful for schools? It's quite evident: nobody can think in environmental way without understanding precisely what we call "Nature", and also what Nature is, what it consists of, how it feels and what it needs. The "Ecosystem's" work and its form of the environmental education puts ideology of young naturalist movement into practice! Woods, wild nature and environmental education cannot be divided. Every reasonable person (not only an ecologist) must know something (have at least a short contact) about the uncontrollable world living according to its own rules, known as Nature.
Elizabeth Lange found that by asking citizens to change their daily habits "to save the environment," "to reduce the exploitation of other people" or even "to save money" were not effective motivators for change. Participants only became interested in the concept of sustainability and transforming their patterns of living and working when the learning process held the promise of enabling them to return to their sense of life purpose, raising their quality of life, and mobilizing their moral and ethical autonomy. In particular, all the participants expressed a need for societal change. Participants clearly identified that public and corporate policies/practices often violated their ethics as to what is good for society and the natural world. Yet, they had a sense of powerlessness, futility and disillusionment in the face of these large systems. They viewed any individual action they could take as symbolic only, rather than substantive. Their powerlessness was most apparent with regard to their work. All the participants were disillusioned with their work - their inability to enact their sense of community service, the instrumental treatment of employees, the utilitarian ethics implicit in bottomline priorities that overshadow human and environmental needs, and the loss of personal ethics within organizational ethics. Therefore, contemporary structures of work dictate against ethical voice. For instance, many feared losing their jobs or their professional credibility if they offered an ethical critique of their work organization and its practices or if they spoke out publicly about an issue related to their work. Yet, many of the participants considered their work as the primary vehicle for their civic responsibility. One reason for low citizen involvement in social and environmental issues, then, is not due to ethical malaise or political despondency. Rather it is related to the lack of protected space for articulating ethical thought, the conflict between professional and citizen responsibilities, and the lack of a broader ethical horizon or overarching ideals that compel a purpose and passion. Therefore, one effective entry point that created an openness to learning about sustainability were these questions about life purpose, community service, and ethical autonomy. The second effective entry point for teaching about sustainability addressed the quality of living and working. All participants reported that the increasingly frenetic and fragmented pace of life negatively impacts health, quality of family life, civic involvement, and likelihood of adopting ecologically sustainable practices. They questioned recent workplace changes that result in longer work days, more intensive pace, and overwhelming workloads. Many of the participants had experienced burn-out or a significant illness in the previous five years. They yearned for a more balanced life where they could respect their bodies, their relationships, their spirituality and the natural world. The concept of sustainability directly related to these daily pressures and was seen to offer a new framework from which to define quality of life - for themselves individually, for their families and for ecological systems.
Dr.Vyacheslav Sharov has developed an ecological lesson for children from radiation contaminated territories we used to teach while they are undergoing rehabilitation at the local sanatoria. Usually the course of treatment takes approx.30 days and in order not to interrupt their studies teachers come to sanatorium and conduct lessons there. We have recognized that it is an excellent opportunity to study ecology there for the sanatorium is located in the beautiful surroundings (lakes, hills and pine-trees all around) in the Ural mountains and they can combine outdoor and indoor lessons which is good for their health. A couple of years ago the rehabilitation program for children from contaminated territories was budgeted rather well, but now it was almost stopped for the lack of money. Only time to time it is resumed if some sponsor has been found. Yuri Skochilov has developed ecological training seminars conducted by Youth EcoCenter. Topics of these > seminars include: "Ecological System"; "Global Ecological Problems", "Ecology of Tajikistan". Youth EcoCenter works with frustrated group of youth, it's an orphanages from Orphanage school No.1 of Dushanbe. This work provides for the support of weakens children and their social rehabilitation. They are from poor and many children families or whose parents were devoid of their rights. Internat provides children with general support, but can not provide them with their further development (placing in a job, home, income etc.). It's a real problem that majority of children can not find a job, University after finishing of Internat and will be under the power of criminals. These children will get skills of carpentry and shoe repair professions. Internat has an extremely small funding and even can not provide children with a normal educational process, good food, clothes and shoes, and textbooks. Youth EcoCenter and Scientifically educational Society assist with social rehabilitation of orphanages through the conducting of ecological trainings, games, competitions, and travel for children.
Answers to questions listed in the Opening Statement
The Earth – year 2024 Nature, the mother of life, has not disappeared. Nevertheless, she is seldom found around us, in our natural habitat. Except for those with a higher economical position - that in my mind will always exist – which can be found in private neighborhoods with luxuries such as private parks. Less fortunate people on the other hand, have to go a little bit out of their way to be in touch with our natural environment. This means, going to the countryside, or even to special resorts where the tempting offer is simply grass, flowers and some common animals. Most animal and plant species will be kept in reserves, to eliminate their possibility of extinction. Still, flora and fauna can be found in cities, since domestication has hardly diminished, but the true living variety Mother Nature has to offer is hardly accessible. The most probable reason for the lack of Nature in cities (especially big ones) is the fact that in this era 85% of the people live in urban centers, thus allowing little space for parks or green spaces of any kind. The remaining amount dedicate their lives to either the exploitation or the conservation of Nature, and therefore need to live closer to it. Technology has replaced many previously manpowered jobs and this has forced people to search in the cities for new employment opportunities. The deterioration of the environment is due to the continuous predominance of poverty among the people of the Earth, and an excessive environmentally damaging consumption of a minority. High levels of contamination also disfavor the development of plants in cities, but contradictorily enough, this is also the reason governments incentive the existence of parks in such places. In the more developed countries – who knows if it will still be Europe and USA, anything can happen - results can actually be seen. Nevertheless, the most popular way to eliminate contamination is through new, inventive technology. Giant fans clean the polluted air expelling it clean but most importantly, breathable, similar processes are done with water, and although the sun’s harmful rays are still an issue, places can be found where temporary ceilings are placed during critical hours of the day. Technology is now helping us to care for Nature. Still, although it has replaced some very contaminating machinery used during the end of past the century, which caused a great amount of the pollution we are now trying to get rid of, the new inventions imply a different type of contamination: a chemical one. It is important to always keep in mind whether, when we try to help Nature we are not simultaneously harming it. For example solar panels which are made to avoid the exploitation of natural sources of energy. To make one of these panels we must use contaminating chemicals, and so it is important to consider which way disturbs Nature less. Many might have noticed that my vision of the future is not very different from the present. That is the way I see it. We will change, but I do not think we will be completely unrecognizable. We will have advanced technologically, but let us hope we do not forget to do it with Mother Nature beside us, instead of leaving her behind. 2. What do you consider important to be done to prevent the environmental catastrophe? I think that in order to prevent a possible environmental catastrophe, it is fundamental that all human beings incorporate into their own scale of moral values the importance of Nature and its protection. This way, people of all ages should know that harming Nature is wrong, the same way they know that hurting a person is wrong. This would be accomplished trough education. This is a difficult task, since it’s difficult for adults to teach children something they are not very sure about themselves. Therefore, it is important to concentrate education on all levels, both for children and adults. Once this is done I believe humanity would have a very strong base to begin to repair already done damages, and to find alternatives for current contaminating machinery, products, transportation, etc. but simultaneously trying not to diminish the quality of people’s lifestyle. Although I agree that a certain sacrifice can be asked of people, it will be very difficult, if not Utopian, to expect them to sacrifice certain daily comforts which are product of civilization itself. In other words, it might be possible for people to become closer to Nature, but they will never agree to living like cave men used to thousands of years ago. But of course, this is not what we should expect of them either. I believe that if we all have a common goal, in this case the prevention of the environmental catastrophe, and we work together to accomplish it, how could we possibly fail? 3. How has the ecological education changed your thinking? Frankly, although I have been receiving a lot of environmental education in this past year and a half, I can’t say it has changed my way of thinking. I will not deny that it has caused enrichment and deepened my thoughts while helping me at the same time to technically justify my opinions, but only because I already had these. I’m not saying this is the case everywhere, but in Argentina environmental education is not compulsive. Therefore, if I am receiving any education of this type it is only because I choose to, and the chances are that if I chose to, it is because I already cared for Nature from the very beginning. I’m not saying I think this is good. I don’t. I think that every student should at least get a base of environmental education (like is done with other subjects) and if each individual wishes to continue specializing on the matter, he or she is welcome to do so. Without that base, many do not even consider it, and thus is born the unconsciousness in people about such a serious problem as the caring of the environment. 4. How do you think ecology should be taught in order to develop an ecological way of thinking in a person? I think that the easiest way of influencing a person is during their childhood. If a child is taught from an early stage that it is wrong to, let’s say lie, he can also be taught that it is wrong to hurt Nature. But in both cases, the transmission of the message depends on the people that surround the child: parents, teachers, relatives, etc. Environmental education should be included into school programs as another compulsive subject, such as math, literature and others, but specially during a certain age. Certain investigations should be done - as they have already been done in the matter of sexual education, for example - to discover the best moment in a child’s life to begin environmental learning. This way, the teaching and learning processes will both be more effective. If this is accomplished correctly, the child will have a natural tendency to protect and care for our natural environment, and will continue having it through out his or her life. Henrique Brusius Renck Brazil 1. What is your vision of the world in 2024? In 25 years the problems in our problem will be the same with the same causes. But they'll be very bigger than today, because there is an especulation that the world's population will double in that time. The basic problems will probably be the scarcity of water and waste landing sites. That's why we have to work with education. Because we need definitive results in a long time, and not only partial results in just few years. 2. What do you consider important to be done to prevent the environment catastrophe? What I mean is that we need to educate the population while the people are still kids and the must be a strong law against the environmental crimes like uncontroled waste landing and things like that. For example, we had some problems with oil leaks, and the responsable people aren't in jail. 3.How has ecological education changed your thinking? The ecological education showed me that there's anything so wonderfull as the environment. It can give us so much pleasure as nothing else. For example I like laying on my back on the green grass under the sun and feeling the wind and hearing the birds very much. I like to swimm in the sea and to eat a fruit under a tree's shade. That is something I want to my children. I learned that the mankind have the power to make it better and better and to destroy it. Unfortunately the second option is still the stronger. 4. How do you think should the ecology be taught to develop an ecological way of thinking in a person? There are two ways of creating an ecological thinking in a person. You can make terrorism ( saying that the water will end if we don't stop wasting it or that we gonna die without oxigen if we keep destroying the trees ) or you can make him love the nature ( showing beauty landscapes or swimming in a lake ). I prefer the second way. And we have to work with children between 8 to 10 years old, because in that age the children still don't have definitive ideas and the already have the capacity of understanding how important is this issue. Reety Arora Q1. What is your vision of the world in 2024? Ans 1. Well the world in 2024 will obviously be very different from what it is today . We can picture the world in 2024 in two different ways , one being the positive way and the other being the negative way. Well lets look at the positive aspect first . The world can surely be a much better place than what it is today. Perhaps in the year 2024 man has used technology in a way to improve the present conditions of the environment . We could have shifted to the moon , purefied the air on earth, reduced the population , found a way to overcome global warming and learned how to sustainibly develop. The other aspect of looking at is would be much the opposite . the earth in 2024 could also become hell. There could be only a few survivors of all the animals , plants and humans living today. The air would become overly polluted that people couldn¦t even step out of the house ,if it would rain it would be acid rain, the ozone layer would have been wiped out, the people would live very short lives due to the numerous amount of diseases that they would suffer from. Perhaps our planet could even be worse than that. We can imagine the earth of 2024 the way we want to but we are the ones who have to decide how we will shape our planet. For we can dream but to accomlplish those dreams lies in our hands. Q2. What do you consider important to be done to prevent the environment catastrophe? Ans2. To me the present world catastrophe seems to be a big problem and we have to work towards improving this condition soon or else+.. I consider that the most important thing that needs to be done to improve the present catastrophe is to educate and aware the people on how they are responsible on adding to toturing the earth and to suggest alternative measures on how they could do the same things in a more eco friendly manner.perhaps we should enforce the idea of sustainable development in peoples heads . wer also should involve people in practical works as people learn more from actions than from words. We should belive that each one of us can make a difference . whether it is by using a cloth bag or by recycling paper or by reducing the population by having only two children ao by making people aware. Q3.How has ecological education changed your thinking? Ans3. Ecological education has changed my thinking a big deal.I¦ll give you a simple example . Earlier I used polythene bags quite frequently not realizing how harmful they were to the environment .but today I know that if I use a polythene bag how much harm it can do to the environment.Hence today I use a cloth bag.now if I amto use something I will first see whether it is environment friendly or not.i have changed so many of my ways and methods to suit the ecological condition today hence ecological education has changed my thinking a lot . Now I think what is eco-friendly not ecoharmful. Q4. How do you think should the ecology be taught to develop an ecological way of thinking in a person? Ans4. I feel that ecology should be taught topeople in order to develop an ecological way of thinking in a much interesting way. We should conduct demonstrations , street plays , make games, involve people in practical work , aware them on how they are specifically harming the ecological balance in nature and what they can do to help revive our green clean environment back. We should basically SHOW people what to do rather than tell them what to do. Nadia Gutina Russia Dear Ayelen, Your answers are of great interest to me and I'm sure they will be interesting to all the participants. This is very important what you are saying in your vision of our planet. That's tru that Nature is seldom found around us, that it is being kild regulary to allow big cities, factories, industry to be placed insted. It all started a long ago. Do you know what is the worst evil in the world? It is when a man drive in four sticks in the ground, cover them with the rope and said: "This is mine". The man changed from cave man to modern. He began to use high technology insted of ax and stone. It is owing to his wit and hard work that now we are living in modern flats with all the fashionable convenience instead of the caves. But the problem is that man can't stop. He wants more and more even if he doesn't need it. The cave man kild for not to die of starvation, the modern man kill for pleasure. One blame tiger for killing a poor hair. But are we of any better? There is some kind of proverbe: when a man kills a tiger we call it hunting game, when a tiger kills a man we call it ferocity. I just wonder do we really need so many factories, industry? Do we need atomic weapons and all the other things? And if we do (of what I'm very unsure) can't we make it less harmful to Naure? I do not know how it is in Argentina but in Russia people and especially the government in the first place think of their own profit and not about Nature. But they forget that their own life dipend on Nature. You probably remember that awful case in Chernobl when because of careless and negligence thousands of people have died and the region was absolutly poisond. Even now the consequences of that catastrophy are revealing itself in ill new-born children and poisond food. But what is awful that though so many people understand it they actually do nothing. Of course there are some new parks in the cities, some regions have improved their ecelogical situation but much more frequently trees are cut down, water is black-brown because of the polution, air is so poluted that it is hard to breath and it cause a lot of deseases. So what I want to say that we should DO, not SAY. Otherwise in 24 years there will be no healthy man on the planet. You are absolutly right that a person should be educated to care for Nature during his childhood. It is the best age to influence a person. But what is if a person can't receive such an education in that age? Your suggestion to include environmental education into school programs as anothe compulsive subject is obviously the best way to develop an ecological way of thinking in a person. But in Russia, for instance, unfortunatly there are quite few teachers who can really do it. So I think that in such cases it might be a useful idea to make some films, even cartoons, to help children to understand and care for Nature. Maybe to create some games. What do you think about it? Nurgul Djanaeva 1. Vision of our planet in year 2024 I don't see any big positive changes: the same trend in relation of societies and people to natural environment. Rapid globalization even worsens the status of nature. Some optimistic attempts from international organization and governments to regulate socio-ecological relations. Citizens'involvement may lead to positive changes via access to control over national and international projects. We are going to sustainable development through crisis. We should realize that we are in the period of crisis and by the year 2024 we may be still in the period of socio-ecological crisis. 2. What is important to be done to prevent the environmental catostrophy: let me share with some thoughts. We, people of the Earth, need a system of changes. To develop and bring this system of changes may be we should try to identify the roots of the problem. To my mind may be, we should differentiate between roots and the consequences. Pollution is, for example, not a root of the problem, but it is its consequence, but it will certainly bring to the environmental catostrophy, if not reduced. It is important to involve more actors - civil society actors, develop new behavioral stereotypes, develop new idols. Prevention of the catastrophe is also based on the shift from anthropocentrism to new anthropocentrism: realistic vision of changes, avoiding illusions, and shift in our tradional values. 3. How the ecological education has changed my thinking Tremendously. It has showed that relation between nature and society is one of the most crucial questions of our contemporary time. It also made me "environmentally" sensitive. 4. How do you think should the ecology be thought to develop an ecological way of thinking in a person In various ways. May be it will help us if the goal of this education is clearly defined. Development of training courses and methods for various target groups (children, governmental officials, NGOs activists, etc.) should reflect the needs and specific objectives. Try at national level to make ecological education in schools and universities compulsory. Development and propaganda of positive alternatives may help to change people's attitude to nature. It is also important to involve mainstream media to address more people. |
|
Copyright Global Community WebNet Ltd.
 |