Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-5mhkq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T14:10:25.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multiple worlds and strange objects: environmental education research as an additive practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2022

Pauliina Rautio Open the ORCID record for Pauliina Rautio [Opens in a new window] ,
Riikka Hohti Open the ORCID record for Riikka Hohti [Opens in a new window] ,
Tuure Tammi Open the ORCID record for Tuure Tammi [Opens in a new window]  and
Henrika Ylirisku Open the ORCID record for Henrika Ylirisku [Opens in a new window]
Pauliina Rautio*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland
Riikka Hohti
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
Tuure Tammi
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland
Henrika Ylirisku
Affiliation:
Aalto University, Helsinki, Finland
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: pauliina.rautio@oulu.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper offers three examples of passionate immersion with strange objects and working with peculiar multispecies assemblages, such as the assemblage of a dove called Romeo and the technology to humidify a greenhouse called ‘Princess’, or the experiment of orienteering in forests for years, accounting for slips, scratches and tumbles as being taught by the forest — and prioritising these over the more commonplace educational narratives. The paper is structured in a nonconventional way in that most space is reserved for reports from these ongoing inquiries. The authors will each discuss how they situate themselves in relation to strangeness in research and how they proceed methodologically, locating their approaches as postqualitative. The questions each example addresses are: What is a strange object? How do we come across them? What do we begin to do/produce with them? The additive orientation described in the research stories is proposed to be an important constituent for new survival knowledge especially relevant for environmental education, addressing environmental problems as wicked, and demanding approaches that reach beyond methodological divides.

Keywords

strange objectsadditive empiricismpostqualitative inquirynonanthropocentrism
Type
Article
Information
Australian Journal of Environmental Education , Volume 38 , Special Issue 3-4: Post-qualitative inquiry: Theory and practice in environmental education , September 2022 , pp. 214 - 226
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, C.E., Guttorm, H.E., Koro-Ljungberg, M., Löytönen, T., Osgood, J., Otterstad, A.M., …Välimäki, A., Darkness matters. Reconceptualizing Educational Research Methodology, 8(2). DOI 10.7577/rerm.2230.Google Scholar
Ashman, A.L. (2017). Oh god, give me horses!. In Feuerstein, A. & Nolte-Odhiambo, C. (Eds.), Childhood and pethood in literature and culture: New perspectives in childhood studies and animal studies. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831. DOI 10.1086/345321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia(B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Despret, V. (2016). What would animals say if we asked the right questions?(B. Buchanan, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domanska, E. (2011). Beyond anthropocentrism in historical studies. Historein, 19, 118–130. DOI 10.12681/historein.11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drummond, J.S., & Themessl-Huber, M. (2007). The cyclical process of action research: The contribution of Gilles Deleuze. Action Research, 5(4), 430–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves, M. (1993). Milford Graves Talk with Wahei Tatematsu [video]. YouTube. Retrieved March 31, 2022 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEuKurFBZ8g Google Scholar
Halberstam, J., & Halberstam, J. (2011). The queer art of failure. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Haraway, D. (2008). When species meet. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Hohti, R., & MacLure, M. (2022). Insect-thinking as resistance to education’s human exceptionalism: Relationality and cuts in more-than-human childhoods. Qualitative Inquiry, 28(3-4), 322–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingold, T. (2013). Prospect. In T. Ingold & G. Pálsson (Eds.), Biosocial Becomings: Integrating Social and Biological Anthropology (pp. 1–21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, C. (2008). Beyond the clearing: Towards a dwelt animal geography. Progress in Human Geography, 32(5), 633–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M. (2009). Phase space: Geography, relational thinking, and beyond. Progress in Human Geography, 33(4), 487–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kortekallio, K. (2019). Becoming-instrument: Thinking with Jeff VanderMeer’s annihilation and Timothy Morton’s hyperobjects. In Karkulehto, S., Koistinen, A.-K., & Varis, E. (Eds.), Reconfiguring human, nonhuman and posthuman in literature and culture (pp. 57–76). New York, NY/London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraftl, P. (2020). After childhood: Re-thinking environment, materiality and media in children’s lives. London, UK/New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krzywoszynska, A., & Marchesi, G. (2020). Toward a relational materiality of soils: Introduction. Environmental Humanities, 12(1), 190–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2016). Foreword in Despret, V. In What would animals say if we asked the right questions? (Vol. 38). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Lorimer, J. (2014). On auks and awkwardness. Environmental Humanities, 4(1), 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupinacci, J., & Happel-Parkins, A. (2016). (Un)Learning anthropocentrism: An ecojustice framework for teaching to resist human-supremacy in schools. In Rice, S. & Rud, A.G. (Eds.), The educational significance of human and non-human animal interactions: Blurring the species line (pp. 13–29). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan US.Google Scholar
Massey, D. (2005). For space. London, UK: SAGE.Google Scholar
Muller, S., Hemming, S., & Rigney, D. (2019). Indigenous sovereignties: Relational ontologies and environmental management. Geographical Research, 57(4), 399–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäkikoskela, R. (2015). Ympäri, sisällä: Kolmiulotteinen työskentely kuvataiteessa(Doctoral dissertation). Aalto ARTS Books, Aalto University publication series Doctoral dissertations 143/2015, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Neimanis, A. (2017). Bodies of water: Posthuman feminist phenomenology. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., Taylor, A., & Blaise, M. (2016). Decentring the human in multispecies ethnographies common worlding. In Taylor, C.A. & Hughes, C. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 149–167). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pickering, A. (2005). Asian eels and global warming: A posthumanist perspective on society and the environment. Ethics and the Environment, 10(2), 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rautio, P., Tammi, T., & Hohti, R. (2021). Childhood after the “animal turn” - child-animal relations and multispecies inquiry. In Yelland, N., Peters, L., Fairchild, N., Tesar, M., & Perez, M.S. (Eds.), Sage handbook of global childhoods (pp. 341–352). London, UK: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, D.B., Van Dooren, T., Chrulew, M., Cooke, S., Kearnes, M., & O’Gorman, E. (2012). Thinking through the environment, unsettling the humanities. Environmental Humanities, 1(1), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruck, A., & Mannion, G. (2021). Stewardship and beyond? Young people’s lived experience of conservation activities in school grounds. Environmental Education Research, 27(10), 1502–1516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springgay, S., & Truman, S.E. (2018). Walking methodologies in a more-than-human world: WalkingLab. Oxford, UK/NewYork, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
St. Pierre, E.A. (2014). A brief and personal history of post qualitative research: Towards ‘post inquiry. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 30(2), 2–20.Google Scholar
Tammi, T. (2020). What if schools were lively more-than-human agencements all along? Troubling environmental education with moldschools. Environmental Education Research, 26(9-10), 1325–1340. DOI 10.1080/13504622.2019.1584881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tammi, T., & Hohti, R. (2020). Touching is worlding: From caring hands to world-making dances in multispecies childhoods. Journal of Childhood Studies, 2(45), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A. (2020). Countering the conceits of the Anthropos: Scaling down and researching with minor players. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 41(3), 340–358.Google Scholar
Taylor, A., & Pacini-Ketchabaw, V. (2015). Learning with children, ants, and worms in the Anthropocene: Towards a common world pedagogy of multispecies vulnerability. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 23(4), 507–529. DOI 10.1080/14681366.2015.1039050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A., & Pacini-Ketchabaw, V. (2018). The common worlds of children and animals: Relational ethics for entangled lives. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsing, A.L. (2010). Arts of inclusion, or, how to love a mushroom. Manoa, 22(2), 191–203.Google Scholar
Van Dooren, T., Kirksey, E., & Münster, U. (2016). Multispecies studies: Cultivating arts of attentiveness. Environmental Humanities, 8(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varto, J. (2008a). Kohti taiteellista ajattelemista: Tanssiopetus taidekasvatuksena. Synnyt/Origins:Finnish Studies in Art Education, 2, 68–86.Google Scholar
Varto, J. (2008b). Taiteellisesta ajattelemisesta. Synnyt/Origins:Finnish Studies in Art Education, 3, 46–68.Google Scholar
Wals, A.E., & Peters, M.A. (2017). Flowers of resistance: Citizen science, ecological democracy and the transgressive education paradigm. In Sustainability science (pp. 29–52). London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, J., & Snaza, N. (2017). Against methodocentrism in educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(11), 1055–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weil, K. (2010). A report on the animal turn. Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, 21(2), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ylirisku, H. (2021). Reorienting environmental art education(Doctoral dissertation). Aalto ARTS Books, Aalto University publication series Doctoral dissertations, 9/2021, Espoo, Finland.Google Scholar