I wish to make clear from the outset that I am not an environmental educator and therefore do not claim to be steeped in particular contemporary issues. I am aware of environmental concerns from a generalist viewpoint, one which I share with primary teachers expected to deliver environmental educational policy in practice. As an educator and researcher in the area of arts education, I frequently apply role playing methodologies to a range of curriculum areas focusing on human issues and would like to share some insights into its specific application to environmental education. I also wish to state that I have a particular interest in developing a socially critical approach to educational issues, so that the use of role play is coloured by this stance.

I have examined a number of policy statements which attempt to influence the content and teaching approaches to environmental education in schools. The Victorian Ministry of Education (1990) Environmental Education makes reference to the importance of student/teacher attitudes, beliefs and dispositions in the social construction of environmental education. Role play deals ‘up front’ with the dispositions of all participants, and thus would seem an ideal vehicle for investigating the human aspects of learning for the environment. The Victorian document (1990: p. 11) further makes clear the approaches teachers should adopt when realising environmental education in practice. Approaches to environmental education should be ‘based on real problems’, ‘clarify values’, be ‘socially critical’ and ‘action oriented’, and also ‘involve students working together in groups’. I wish to demonstrate how this cluster of recommended approaches can be met through the use of role play.

The paper has two intentions: The first is to discuss how role play can facilitate recommended environmental education in theory. The second is to show how these ideas may be practically realised during the investigation of a selected issue.

This paper is an outgrowth of my work for the Bicentennial Australian Studies Schools Project (BASSP) for which I wrote the booklet, Education for the Australian Environment (Fien 1988). This was one of ten booklets on Australian Studies distributed to every primary and secondary school in Australia early in 1988. The purpose of Education for the Australian Environment was to provide guidelines for injecting an Australian Studies perspective into environmental education. In the final chapter of the first draft of the booklet I sought to provide a framework for the development of an environmental education policy through a process of curriculum inquiry at the individual school level.

In part, I was moved to include a framework for school level curriculum work in environmental education by concerns expressed by Gough (1987) and Robottom (1987a) about the value of centrally-developed policy statements on environmental education. While the 1977 Tbilisi Declaration urged UN member states to prepare policies “to introduce environmental concerns, activities and content into their education systems”, Gough and Robottom urged caution over the use of centralised policies as instruments for educational change. In summary, the reasons for their concern stemmed from the potential danger that centrally developed policies might foreclose debate over the nature, goals and practices of environmental education and, thus, supplant local innovations and variations in environmental education with uniform prescriptions. They also expressed concern that the hierarchical pattern of authority embedded in centralised curriculum decision making was inappropriate to environmental education and that it could easily lead to the deskilling and disempowerment of environmental educators at the grassroot levels.

Environmental education owes its very existence to a particular interpretation of reality. My purpose here is to examine critically the “selected fictions” on which that view of reality is based — to examine the ways in which our perceptions of environmental problems and issues are “conditioned by our position in space and time”. I will argue that some of these perceptions constitute unsustainable fictions and will consider some ways in which we might work towards living lives based on more sustainable constructions of human interrelationships with their environments. I will begin with an illustration of how an interpretation of reality can be changed by taking (to coin Durrell's metaphor) two paces east or west — by glimpsing something familiar from an unusual vantage point.

In June 1992, the UN Conference on Environment and Development will be held in Brazil. A follow up to the World Commission on Environment and Development, it will mark the twentieth anniversary of the first UN conference on the environment, held in Stockholm in 1972. Promoting environmental education is one of 23 objectives for the conference.

Conference delegates in Brazil are likely to hear that the global ecological crisis has worsened, that sustainable development is not being realised, and that there is a continuing need for education. Yet more initiatives in environmental education are likely to be advocated and some delegates will go away feeling happier.

What they and others may fail to realise is that much environmental education is part of the problem rather than the solution. Current practice fails to reveal the true causes of environmental problems and to educate pupils in ways which enable them to realise sustainable development. It is based on inadequate theory and practice yet receives increasing support from powerful elites who must manage the global ecological crisis in their own interests.

There is increasing awareness of environmental issues in Australia (Victorian Government 1986, 1987). However, public participation in many such issues is typically limited to comment and submission on government policy, management plans and a range of other environmental statements. It is rare for the public to be involved in the scientific research upon which many environmental policies are based.

Recent surveys for the rare and endangered Leadbeater's Possum, Gymnobelideus leadbeateri have been an exception to this trend (Lindenmayer et al. 1990a, 1990b, 1990c). These studies have used a new wildlife survey technique termed stagwatching (Lindenmayer, 1989; Lindenmayer & Press, 1989) involves observing and counting animals emerging from nest and den sites in very large living or dead trees with hollows (“stags”) at, or close to, dusk. Animals are observed and recognised in silhouette. Because many Australian animals regularly move between nest sites, stagwatching is dependent on simultaneously watching all stags in a known area (= 3 ha in this study) (Smith et al. 1989). This makes stagwatching extremely labour intensive and its success is dependent on substantial participation by the public. Our experience of this public support suggests that stagwatching has considerable value for use in public and environmental education to increase the awareness of methods of study and understanding of forest biology and conservation. The values of stagwatching in environmental education are identified in this paper, and a case study of the use of stagwatching in surveys for Leadbeater's Possum is also presented. The methods used to organise the stagwatching program are documented so they may be adopted and modified for teaching a range of topics about Australian forests.

Few would doubt the need, in today's world, to promote behaviours that actively conserve environmental resources. At a general level, this often involves encouraging behaviours that involve a short-term cost for the individual in order to avoid a long-term negative outcome for the community. Examples of such behaviour are, taking the trouble to turn off lights to save electricity and fixing leaking taps to conserve water. It is these latter kinds of behaviours, namely those associated with the efficient use of water resources, which are the focus of this paper.

Faced with the high economic and practical costs of attempting to supply unlimited amounts of water for the Melbourne metropolitan area, the Board of Works has sought, by a number of means, to persuade its consumers to use water more efficiently. One aspect of its strategy was to promote water conservation within the educational curriculum by designing various educational materials and programs for different school levels. These and other promotional materials were made available to schools in the Melbourne metropolitan area in 1988. Prior to the distribution of this material, the data reported in this paper were gathered as the first stage of a longitudinal evaluation of the Board's education strategy.

The assumption underlying the Board of Works' educational program was that behaviour change is preceded by changes in knowledge. For example, it was assumed that a person, knowing something about the water cycle, and the system by which water is fed into our taps, would believe that it is important not to waste water. The result would be active water conservation in daily life. Some basis for this assumption has been provided by the report on domestic water use in Perth, Western Australia (Metropolitan Water Authority, 1985), where knowledge and attitudes were found to be predictors of actual water consumption. Such an assumption is based in a general way on a cognitive or information processing model of behaviour change, in which changes in behaviour are seen as proceeding from changes in relevant information or knowledge. This cognitive model is the basis for many social education programs both in schools and in the community. For example, the Quit Campaign and the AIDS campaign have both used strategies that aimed to inform the public about particular health-related behaviours.

Environmental education in Australian schools is generally becoming recognised as education for the environment, as distinct from but usually including education ‘about’ and education ‘in’ the environment (Greenall, 1987). This means that students of environmental education will be encouraged to develop an attitude of caring for the Earth (including the biosphere) and its resources, and to participate actively in maintaining and improving the quality of their environment. What encourages students (and ourselves) to move actively towards these goals?

The desire to ‘act’, it will be argued, comes from within ourselves. Until recently taking action for the environment has been seen as the top of a hierarchy of environmental education objectives. It has been assumed that an awareness of environmental problems leads to the acquisition of knowledge, which contributes to the development of attitudes and values and a feeling of concern for the environment, which then prompts one to take positive actions for the environment (see for example, Carin and Sund, 1985, p.88). However more recent research has attempted to formulate theoretical models identifying the factors (and their possible causal connections) which result in individuals taking responsible environmental action. Hines et al., (1988), for example, hypothesised that personality factors (such as one's ‘locus of concern’), knowledge of issues and action strategies, and action skills were positively correlated with taking responsible environmental action. The causal connections are problematic however and Iozzi(1988) concluded that simply being aware of environmental concerns and knowledgeable about them does not automatically lead to taking action for the environment.