Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking Skills in ESD

Author(s):

Annelie Ott(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)

Format:

Paper

Session Information

30 SES 11 A, Enganging with Skills Development in ESD

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-24

17:15-18:45

Room:

K6.08

Chair:

Johan Öhman

Contribution

In this paper, I will examine different understandings of critical thinking and their implications for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). Critical thinking is one of the central elements of ESD. It is listed as key issue in UNESCO`s Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Programme (UNESCO, 2014), it is has been identified as one of the essential principles of ESD in an international Delphi study (Rieckmann, 2012) and plays a vital role in the concept of action competence (e.g. Breiting, Hedegaard, Mogensen, Nielsen, & Schnack, 1999; Jensen & Schnack, 2006).

Critical thinking as central element of pluralistic teaching traditions is often contrasted by normative-instrumental approaches (e.g. Breiting et al., 1999; Mogensen & Schnack, 2010; Sandell, Öhman, & Östman, 2005; Vare & Scott, 2007). Yet, while this dichotomy is well-established in ESD, discussions of what critical thinking actually entails, are rare in the field. Through this paper, I intend to stimulate and contribute to such a debate.

The paper is based on an explorative literature review and data gathered in my ongoing PhD-project. It will give insight into the role of critical thinking in theory and practice – how academics and practitioners understand the concept und how they place it within the bigger picture of Education for Sustainable Development. Taking this as a starting point, I will further discuss conceptual challenges linked to critical thinking skills.

As an example, critical thinking frequently is associated with an “independent”, critic mind. This comes forth in the academic literature (e.g. Breiting, 2009; Short, 2009; Smith, Loughran, Berry, & Dimitrakopoulos, 2012), excerpts of teacher interviews provided by Hasslöf, Lundegård and Malmberg (2016) and in informal conversations I have had with social studies teachers. Other aspects that occur in the discourse on critical thinking in ESD include dimensions as e.g. reflection and analysis (Jensen & Schnack, 2006), evaluation and assessment (cf. Hasslöf, Lundegård, & Malmberg, 2016; Hasslöf & Malmberg, 2015) and criticism (Öhman, 2006). In this paper, I will discuss different ideas of critical thinking with respect to their consistency and relevance for sustainable development.

Method

The data material for this paper is twofold. It consists of a) selected academic articles on critical thinking within ESD which is supplemented by b) teacher interviews. For the analysis, I will draw on discourse theory with the main goal being to analyze and discuss theoretical approaches to critical thinking. The empirical material will mainly illustrate and substantiate these approaches. The explorative review will include articles that discuss or present ideas of critical thinking. The interview-study will be conducted during spring 2017 with social studies teachers from Norwegian upper secondary schools. The teachers will be invited via mail to participate in the study – under the premise that they have taught an ESD-related topic during the current or the last school year. I will collect data through in-depth interviews based on a semi-structured questionnaire. The questionnaire will address general elements as teaching methods and the purpose of ESD-classes, and will further include specific questions on the role of critical thinking skills. In addition, the teachers will be asked to bring their teaching material to exemplify and discuss statements in detail. For the analysis, I will draw on discourse theory as described by Laclau and Mouffe (2001) and concretized by Jørgensen and Phillips (2002). Central for my analysis is Laclau and Mouffe`s notion of how meaning arises from other, interrelated signs. Thus, the meaning of a sign depends on its position within a wider net of signs. Critical thinking, to draw on Laclau and Mouffe`s terminology, can be regarded as a nodal point in ESD – a central topic around which other signs and meanings cluster. As nodal point that is rather open and undefined, critical thinking further resembles a floating signifier that develops fixed meaning only through concrete articulations. These concrete meanings articulated in the academic literature and the teacher interviews, moments as Laclau and Mouffe call them, are the primary focus of the analysis. A similar analysis has been undertaken by Hasslöf and Malmberg (2015) and Hasslöf et al. (2016), albeit with a different kind of data material and content wise rather oriented towards matters of pluralism and normativism/instrumentalism. In this paper, the prime focus will lie on general conceptual ideas of critical thinking. The analysis will thus serve as a means to trace theoretical ideas, practices and paradoxes to open up the field for further inquiry and discussion.

Expected Outcomes

One expected outcome concerns the connotation of the term critical thinking, which I suspect to be generally positive, e.g. critical thinking is likely linked to ideas as empowerment through individual inquiry (cf. Hasslöf et al., 2016; Hasslöf & Malmberg, 2015). Albeit that overall common understanding of critical thinking as necessary and empowering skill, I also expect to find ambiguous (see above) and probably paradoxical ideas of what critical thinking is and what role it can play within ESD. The literature, for instance, points to a certain selectiveness as to where and in which contexts critical thinking is encouraged or seen as meaningful (e.g. Børhaug, 2014; Læssøe, 2010) indicating a gap between theoretical ideas of pluralism and more restricted practices in education and society.

References

Breiting, S. (2009). Issues for environmental education and ESD research development: looking ahead from WEEC 2007 in Durban. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 199-207. doi: 10.1080/13504620902807584 Breiting, S., Hedegaard, K., Mogensen, F., Nielsen, K., & Schnack, K. (1999). Action competence - conflicting interests and Environmental Education. Odense: Odense Universitetsforlag. Børhaug, K. (2014). Selective Critical Thinking: a textbook analysis of education for critical thinking in Norwegian social studies Policy Futures in Education, 12(3). Hasslöf, H., Lundegård, I., & Malmberg, C. (2016). Students’ qualification in environmental and sustainability education—epistemic gaps or composites of critical thinking? International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 259-275. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2016.1139756 Hasslöf, H., & Malmberg, C. (2015). Critical thinking as room for subjectification in Education for Sustainable Development. Environmental Education Research, 21(2), 239-255. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2014.940854 Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (2006). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 12(3-4), 471-486. doi: 10.1080/13504620600943053 Jørgensen, M., & Philips, L. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Practice. London: Sage Publications. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London, New York: Verso. Læssøe, J. (2010). Education for sustainable development, participation and socio-cultural change. Environmental Education Research, 16(1), 39-57. doi: 10.1080/13504620903504016 Mogensen, F., & Schnack, K. (2010). The action competence approach and the ‘new’ discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research, 16(1), 59-74. doi: 10.1080/13504620903504032 Rieckmann, M. (2012). Future-oriented higher education: Which key competencies should be fostered through university teaching and learning? Futures, 44(2), 127-135. Sandell, K., Öhman, J., & Östman, L. (2005). Education for sustainable development. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Short, P. C. (2009). Responsible Environmental Action: Its Role and Status In Environmental Education and Environmental Quality. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(1), 7-21. doi: 10.1080/00958960903206781 Smith, K. V., Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Dimitrakopoulos, C. (2012). Developing Scientific Literacy in a Primary School. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 127-152. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.565088 UNESCO. (2014). Roadmap for Implementing the Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable Development: UNESCO. Vare, P., & Scott, W. (2007). Learning for a Change: Exploring the Relationship Between Education and Sustainable Development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1(2), 191-198. doi: 10.1177/097340820700100209 Öhman, J. (2006). Pluralism and criticism in environmental education and education for sustainable development: a practical understanding. Environmental Education Research, 12(2), 149-163. doi: 10.1080/13504620600688856

Author Information

Annelie Ott (presenting / submitting)

University of Oslo

Department of Teacher Education and School Research

Oslo

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.