Scientific research on environmental education in Brazil, whose first productions date back from the 1980s, has undergone significant growth since the 2000s. Such phenomenon is closely related to the expansion of postgraduate programs around the country. Hence, this academic environment, itself comprised of several fields of knowledge, has been the main locus of research production in this area. Environmental education research (EER) is characterized by interdisciplinarity and its diversity of epistemological, theoretical, and methodological approaches. This field of research emerged in Brazil in the 1980s—the first master’s dissertation was concluded in 1981 and the first doctoral thesis in 1990. Several dissertations were presented throughout the 1980s as well as a significant number of theses in the 1990s; nonetheless, EER was not yet widely noticeable, still holding a timid and disperse presence in the scientific scope. EER found its expansion as a relatively autonomous field in the late 1990s and early 2000s, a period when scientific events in education—such as the meetings of the National Postgraduate and Research Associations (ANPED and ANPPAS) and the Environmental Education Research Meeting (EPEAs) dedicate specific attention in their programming for discussion about the research developed in this field. One may also trace back to the 2000s the emergence of the first scientific journals focused on EER. Environmental education has been the object of constant production of scientific investigation papers, most recently even by works of meta research which, in its vast majority, converge regarding their critical stances on the developmental capitalist model. In the past decades research in environmental education has incorporated new epistemic debates stemming from the field of social sciences which involve, for instance, post critical thinking, decolonial perspective, neo-materialism, post-humanism, among others; seeking to propose pedagogical pathways capable of standing against both crescent environmental fragility and social exclusion which are deepening in the 21st century.
Queer(ing) writing theories and pedagogies serve as fertile ground for the practice and the teaching of writing. This review synthesizes foundational and recent literature on how queer theoretical frameworks and understandings may lead to deeper and transformative writing and writing instruction in secondary English language arts classrooms and, on some level, postsecondary writing/composition. There is little foundational research on queering the ELA writing classroom specifically. What has been taken up is how queer identity and orientations impact and may be impacted by literacy participation and practice. While research takes up queer orientations of literacy practice broadly, this review examines and designates, in some cases, how literacy scholarship that uses queer and queering frameworks might be understood in relation to writing and teaching writing in English language arts classrooms specifically. In addition, the review synthesizes research that considers queer orientations and understandings of writing instruction and practice that are relevant to secondary and early postsecondary contexts.
Environmental and sustainability education (later: ESE) can evoke and include a broad spectrum of emotions, ranging from joy and excitement to sadness and powerlessness. These eco-emotions (also called environmental emotions and ecological emotions) can be related to many things: for example, to relationships with more-than-human nature (later: nature), to the content of education, and to the pedagogical style of the educator. Emotions affect learning outcomes in many ways, and they may be important learning outcomes in their own right. They also have complex connections with both action and well-being. Classic themes in ESE are care, empathy with nature, and place attachment, often combined with awe and wonder. It has been argued that if people care for the environment affectively, they are more motivated to shape their behavior to be more sustainable. Another major theme is difficult emotions because of environmental problems and threats. Although this theme has been present in ESE for long, it has grown much more intense over time. It is related both to current losses and to predictions of future, connecting ESE with futures education. Phenomena such as eco-anxiety, ecological grief, and eco-guilt are now much discussed (see also the separate Oxford Bibliographies article Education for Sustainable Development), and this bibliography focuses on them; there are large separate literatures on positive emotions. The relation of difficult emotions to hope and action has strongly interested ESE scholars. Scholars have studied eco-emotions among both students and educators. It has been pointed out that educators need self-reflection and social support in order to engage constructively with eco-emotions. Furthermore, scholars have applied critical theory, decolonial theory, feminist theory, and various anti-oppressive pedagogies to point out that there are power structures and social norms around eco-emotions which need attention. Awareness of these factors can facilitate more just and open engagements with eco-emotions in education, and scholars have warned against overly strong presuppositions of the superiority of certain emotions and their valences. For example, the so-called negative emotions such as anxiety, worry, fear, grief, guilt, and anger can be important for transformative learning. Applying various resources, for example from psychology, educators and scholars have explored context-sensitive methods for encountering these eco-emotions in a constructive way. Key recommendations include public recognition of emotional issues by the educator, validation of various emotions, providing various opportunities for action, and use of embodied and creative methods to engage with emotional energies. Arts-based and contemplative methods have been prominently applied to the subject area, for example in new kinds of place-based activities.
Black women’s racial, ethnic, and indigenous histories and cultures in the United States and the diaspora are inextricably linked to historical legacies of survival and triumph. Black women’s unique place and space within the United States undergird who they are as individuals and collectively as Black women. Whether Black women acknowledge or disrupt it—the pervasiveness of Black women’s oppression does not disappear when they pursue higher education. Black women (learn to) understand how they make meaning of their identities and identity development as Black women across their lifespans and contexts. Some Black women (re)define who they are, some thrive and build community, others experience detrimental costs, and still, some experience all the above at different points in their lifetime. They navigate who they are in relation to their pre-collegiate socialization experiences (e.g., familial/communal upbringing, understanding of history, identity saliency). These pre-collegiate experiences influence how Black women engage and interact with others as they move into and through their tertiary environments. Collegiate contexts and environments vary—community college, single-sex, predominantly or historically white institutions (PWI or HWI), minority-serving institutions (MSI), public or private—and so too do the institutional agents who interact with and educate Black women (e.g., faculty, staff, and administrators). Through these interactions with others, Black women have often been rendered invisible or hyper-visible, meaning they are not considered in institutional decision making or tokenized for being “the only” or “one of few” in their academic discipline. Black women’s experiences are often conflated with white women when discussing gender or sexism, and Black men when discussing race or racism. Critical examination of Black women’s experiences requires one to name the situatedness of Black women within the context of institutionalized structures and systems. In other words, examination of Black undergraduate women must include critical and intersectional perspectives that overtly problematize practices and policies that sustain marginalization and perpetuate gendered racism against Black women.
Gender inequality has been a long-standing issue in academia, and it remains an unresolved challenge, despite progress made in recent decades through policies implemented at various levels to foster gender equality and inclusion. Extensive scientific literature has been produced over the last thirty years from various perspectives and on different aspects of the gender gap and power asymmetries in the academic profession. Scholars have highlighted the role of many factors in producing and reproducing gender inequalities at different stages of an academic career and in different contexts. Structural and cultural factors are related to individuals, organizations, and institutional contexts, and analyses can be developed at different levels: micro, meso, and macro. It is from this analytical perspective that our bibliography moves. From the vast body of literature on gender inequality in academia, we have identified a selection of resources based on their originality, impact, and contribution to the debate. We first present references for a general overview of the topic, followed by a section on the different types of gender gaps in academia, alongside references to online resources related to data and technical analysis of gender inequalities in academia at a global level. The following sections are organized according to the level of analysis adopted. The section on micro-level perspectives presents references from studies focused on individual factors; the meso-level section includes studies looking at the organizational structures, cultures, and practices of universities and departments; while the references included in the last section—on macro-level perspectives—examine the role of policies and institutional actors. Finally, policies and plans for fostering gender equality in universities and different kinds of resistances are considered.
Much of what people know about the environment and the world around them is learned outside of schooling. Everyday and incidental learning (e.g., magazines, newspapers, Internet) have rapidly become more prominent with the mobility and interconnectedness of handheld electronics and nearly constant connectivity, yet two other structures of learning, those of nonformal and informal environmental learning, remain important ways in which people learn about the world around them. Whether map-led nature walks, exhibits in museums, or interpretive signage in a park or zoo, informal education efforts are important in the learningscape of an individual. The nonformal elements of workshops, programs, guided experiences, and museum shows or first-person interpretation often help learners transition from the “wow” to the “what” of our world, including the natural and constructed components of it. The differences between the structures of informal and nonformal learning are important for designing learning experiences that are highly transferrable to other informal and nonformal learning contexts.
"Supporting young children to cope, build resilience, and heal from trauma through play a practical guide for early childhood educators 1st Edition." Education 3-13, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), pp. 1–2 AcknowledgmentsThe authors thank our mentor, Hafizh Zain Abdillah from STIKES Citra Delima Bangka Belitung, Indonesia for mentoring and editing the manuscript.
