This week, I’m going to focus my blog on the socio-cognitive benefits and importance of ecological and environmental education. This was brought up through conversations with Aaron, both and off this blog forum, in which we agreed that we felt that children and students of all ages could learn a great deal, and their cognitive and social development be definitely promoted, through learning about the harmonious functioning natural ecosystems. Nature, we agreed, is one of the greatest teachers.
The natural world is full of systems of symbiotic and harmonious relationships. Symbiosis relates to the interaction of two or more properties, organisms or factors, when the nature of that interaction is of benefit to both. This relates to the natural reality of synergy also, whereby these kinds of symbiotic interaction are actually productive of the emergence of new factors, properties or organisms that never would have emerged otherwise. In the natural world, synergy is the core of Emergence Theory, which suggests that the rich complexity demonstrated in physical, chemical, biological, natural and human systems, arises out of a manifold number of relatively simple interactions. This relates to Aristotle’s famous saying that “the whole if more than the sum of its parts”, and examples of this process at work in the natural world could relate to an ant colony, for instance, as given on Wikipedia:
“The queen does not give direct orders and does not tell the ants what to do. Instead, each ant reacts to stimuli in the form of chemical scent from larvae, other ants, intruders, food and build up of waste, and leaves behind a chemical trail, which, in turn, provides a stimulus to other ants. Here each ant is an autonomous unit that reacts depending only on its local environment and the genetically encoded rules for its variety of ant. Despite the lack of centralized decision making, ant colonies exhibit complex behavior and have even been able to demonstrate the ability to solve geometric problems. For example, colonies routinely find the maximum distance from all colony entrances to dispose of dead bodies.”
Or it could relate to the biological organisation of life, from the subatomic level to the entire biosophere:
“Individual atoms can be combined to form molecules such as polypeptide chains, which in turn fold and refold to form proteins, which in turn create even more complex structures. These proteins, assuming their functional status from their spatial conformation, interact together and with other molecules to achieve higher biological functions and eventually create an organism.”
The crucial thing here is the fact that we are discussing already extant systems of relationships that are to the benefit of all, and that allow, when functioning optimally, the emergence of totally new factors.
Learning about these kinds of relationships could be crucially important in students coming to understand that cooperation does not always mean compromise, and that while there is a time when competition is the best option for the whole system (as with capitalistic systems, competition between parties looking to provide a service results in the highest quality of service at the lowest price being available to the consumer – ideally), it is quite possible for groups of persons, arranged in organisations, businesses, nations etc. to engage in mutually beneficial relationships where not only does everyone come off at least as well as if they had ‘gone it alone’, but totally new benefits are able to emergence in a manner never possible otherwise.
A fascinating example of such processes at work in human systems is co-intelligence (check out the Co-Intelligence Institute), otherwise known as “the wisdom of crowds”. This relates to the idea that, in certain situations, when a diverse group of motivated people come together to solve problems in a cooperative manner, their capacity to do so is fundamentally enhanced compared to any effort they were to make alone.
In relation to how such education on ecological systems might facilitate cognitive development, it is necessary to recognise that ‘system thinking’ (click here for research, and here for a simpler wiki definition), the kind of which would be necessary to understand the systems of relationships here described, actually requires quite sophisticated cognitive operations. One mathematical model of cognitive development, the Model of Hierarchical Complexity by Michael Commons at Harvard, has been suggested as an alternative to constructionist theories such as Piaget’s and that defines the qualitative difference between different stages of development as a function of the complexity of the behaviour considered. This model provides corresponding stages to Piaget’s four main stages, but provides additional ‘post-formal operational’ stages also. Crucially, the Model of Hierarchical Complexity suggests that the movement from its stage that corresponds to Piaget’s formal operations (his most final stage of cognitive development) to the next stage, involves the development of the capacity to move beyond cognitive operations defined by linear cause and effect relationships to the capacity to reason in terms of non-linear systems of relationships, where every part’s action is dependent and active upon every other part.
Stages beyond this involve the capacity to perform operations on systems, and then systems of systems and so on, but the key point here is that exposure to these kinds of natural systems, promotes the beginnings of system thinking, which is itself, as discussed, extremely important for building the kinds of cooperative (and competitive, where appropriate) and mutually beneficial relationships that may hopefully characterise our world in the future.
In researching this topic, I was encouraged to see that there are already some great educational and in school initiatives going on in this respect, some of them government sponsored. Here are a couple of links:
infoacquisitionhub 
The idea that nature is our greatest teacher is a common conception, and I agree that the social and cognitive growth of children could be enhanced through learning about the systems and structures existing in nature.
The eco schools teach and promote sustainability and the development of environmentally friendly technology, which is of course a very important issue around the globe.
Learning from nature creates knowledge that can be transfered to human interactions, both private and corporative.
Additionally, learning IN nature can also have positive effects on people. In this world of internet, television and game consoles, less and less children spend time outside, playing and exploring. Several studies have found that being in nature has a positve effect on well-being, with health promotion initiatives encouraging people to spend at least some time every day outside. A study at the university of Rochester found that being outdoors makes people feel more ‘alive’, more resilient to physical illness and can eleviate stress and low moods. Richard Ryan, author of the article called nature ‘fuel for the soul’.
From my own experience, being and working in nature can be truly transformational: When I worked as a volunteer with homeless young people, we went on an outdoor residential in the Lake District. On one of the days we did some conservation work – digging out trees and re-planting them. The lads, some of which were bad tempered and hard to communicate with, and others who were on curfew for various violent acts, turned into the most amazing team players, working with such dedication and enthusiams that it was hard to stop them. On the one hand it was the manual labour which they enjoyed so much, but I think a big factor was also being in nature, “back to the roots”.
So I believe eco-education can be beneficial in order to understand ways of interaction and working together as an alternative to competiton and individualism. And it can also be beneficial in order to re-connect with nature, which we are a part of, by going out there and being physically close to it. This can impact postively on our own well-being and create a greater awareness of the importance of sustainable living.
Forgot to post this – there is actually something called nature deficiency disorder…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder#cite_note-schools-13
After reading Wilber’s interpretation of Piaget’s stages of cognitive development it occurred me that to understand the principle of symbiosis requires complex functions to comprehend the multitude of interrelationships and the integrative nature of these systems. Initially I thought this type of material could be incorporated into primary education. However, with the capacity to understand these concepts requiring formal operational cognition, which occurs from approximately 11 years of age onwards, I questioned whether it would be of any benefit within the earlier ages of education. I think that there are notions within the context of symbiosis which would not require such thought capacity and would still contribute towards an understanding of the importance of cooperation etc. However, to fully grasp the overarching notions would require the later stages of development. Thus, if this mode of education were carried on throughout development I think it would provide a thorough and deep understanding allowing individuals to assimilate these notions with regards to the role of self, the role of societal self and the role of self in relation to nature.
Pingback: A Synthesis of Posts During the Module and a New Vision for Education | infoacquisitionhub