In Bloom

“[T]ransliteracy deliberately refuses to presuppose any kind of offline/online divide; indeed it posits a complete interpellation of one by the other within everyday life”

(Thomas et al., 2007)

Life in the ecotechnic age requires awareness of our “interconnectedness with life and all other beings”. We do our best to act responsibly, but we don’t yet know the implications of those actions for all of our connections (Angus et al., 2001).

In the UK, the Government’s plans for increasingly localised responsibility (DirectGov, 2010) echoes that seen in online environmental activism, individualisation of actions feel more achievable, within a person’s immediate control, rather than wider global concerns (Pickerill, 2003). We are told to “think global, act local”, but should we not find a balance in this as with everything else?

As much as our home gives us a sense of place, Pickerill (2003) suggests that online “cross-movement, cross-cultural” interaction can also lead to a change in an individual’s sense of identity. Environmental issues are equally important for those in developing countries (Dunlap & Mertig, 1995), people with a stronger connection to the traditional skills and knowledge that we in the West are in danger of losing. We have much to learn but more to remember.

While we are overconsuming the Earth’s resources, we are also overconsuming our own. We need to learn “better” not learn “more” – “authentic education... rooted in place and tradition” (Sterling, 2009).

Setting the Seed

“”We” have nothing to lose but “our” selves”

(Badminton, 2003)

Edwards (2010) suggests that “in enacting the post-human, we move beyond the concept of learning as a purpose of education more towards a purpose of responsible experimenting”. We can’t reduce the “unpredictability” of the future (Edwards, 2010) but we can rather gather those “things that matter”.

I was inspired by Angus et al.’s (2001) work on cyborg pedagogy – encouraging students to “take personally the issues they study”. Educators can choose a topic for the students to investigate (Demetrious, 2004; Larsen and Faden, 2008) or can leave the student to choose something that resonates with them (Angus et al., 2001) – the latter a process that, for educator and student, can feel both risky and exciting (Edwards, 2010).

This reflective process gives a feeling of “ownership” to the student (Winkelmann 1995), they are “actively collaborating” (Usher & Edwards, 1998), it is “transformative” learning (Sterling, 2009). There is a “redefinition of the role of teacher” (Usher & Edwards, 1998) – there still remains a guiding, encouraging role, support structures if assistance is needed (Angus et al., 2001; Winkelmann, 1995).

Greer (2009) encourages us to think of ourselves as “cultural conservers” – find our focus, our passion, that aspect of our culture and tradition that we value most, work with simplicity and share our experiences, teaching others who come after us following the same path. Drawing on our culture, we are practising a living heritage not preserving a dead one, and in the process, growing toward the future.

If the process of learning excites us, holds our attention, “connects” with us, we remember it better (Angus et al., 2001) and can draw on it when the time is right. This “transformative” learning is “one that values and sustains people and nature... more holistic, participative, and practical” (Sterling, 2009).