ERIC EJ966892: Finding Canada outside: Building National Identity through Place-Based Outdoor Education

2011·0.15 MB·English

by  ERIC

Sense of Place
Finding Canada Outside: Building National
Identity through Place-Based Outdoor Education
By Katherine Joyce
If, as Benedict Anderson (2006) argues, history taught with the purpose of building
nations are little more than imagined national identity is often fraught with myth,
communities, then we need to find a way to and excludes the vast majority of people
make imagining the connections between from its timeline. Conversely, Canadian
citizens possible. In a country as diverse as history does not have to be presented this
Canada, spread over an incomprehensibly way. National identity can be located in the
large land mass, these connections may present, not the past, and in the landscape
require more imagination than Anderson instead of embodied in a few political leaders
had in mind. One way that these connections and historical figures. This will make it more
have been traditionally imagined in Canada inclusive of all Canadians.
is through national myths, including the
myth of the wilderness. This myth draws the Creating this new sense of national identity
Canadian identity out of an “untouched” can and should be done in schools through
wilderness landscape. place-based outdoor education programs.
Place-based pedagogy, as described by
This conception of the Canadian identity Andrew Foran (2005), “help[s] students
is rife with problems. By nature, myths connect with their unique place in the
are exclusionary, privileging those who world” by blending together outdoor
already enjoy power in society. The myth and experiential education, along with
of the wilderness draws its power from an geography and history. Although outdoor
imagined landscape devoid of people, except education programs do not have to be
for those who are using it as a recreational specifically designed or connected to their
space, perhaps canoeists. Those who use unique locations, Andrew Brookes (2002)
this landscape for survival, most notably argues that the most effective ones are.
Aboriginal peoples, but also rural inhabitants
who live off the land, are conspicuously Places are important because they are both
absent. They do not figure prominently physical locations as well as locations with
into the picture that the word “wilderness” meanings attributed to them by a person
brings to mind. or a group of people. E. Relph (1976), a
geographer who has written extensively
But, as much as there are problems with about place, argues that “[t]o be human is to
the wilderness myth of Canada, the land live in a world that is filled with significant
provides a valuable connection between all places: to be human is to have and to know
disparate members of Canadian society. And your place” (p. 6). Knowing one’s place
so, I would like to propose a much more helps people understand who they are, and
inclusive re-imagining of this myth, in which so people with strong connections to place
we draw national identity from the land in are more secure in their existence than those
all the variety of its meanings and uses. In who are not.
this way, Canadians can work to develop
attachments to their specific pieces of land, The attachment to place experienced by
while acknowledging the interconnections of communities and individuals “constitutes
the national landscape. our roots in places; and the familiarity S
that this involves is not just a detailed Y
A
There is no doubt that in all countries, but knowledge, but a sense of deep care and W
perhaps more significantly in democratic concern for that place” (Relph, 1976, p. H
T
ones, schools play an important nation- 37). We need to work to facilitate the A
P
building role. Traditionally, this role has development of this concern for place in our
been fulfilled through the study of history, increasingly suburbanized and placeless 29
which is not without its problems. National world, in which the identity of places are
Sense of Place
weakening “to the point where they not only identity as individuals and as members of
look alike but feel alike and offer the same the community” (Relph, 1976, p. 39). If we
bland possibilities of experience” (p. 90). This all become attached to our homes, to our
concern could encourage us, as a society, local communities, we can create a Canadian
to work to maintain our distinct places, identity based on shared connections to the
which will not only protect our national land. Although the pieces of land will be
identity but also enhance our environmental different, the land will become valued as an
protection measures. important part of being Canadian. Protecting
the environment will become linked to what
Currently, more than 80% of Canadians live it means to be Canadian, thus entwining
in urban areas. For those who grow up in concern for the land and Canadian identity.
urban areas, there are very few opportunities
for daily interactions with nature, with But, as you probably know, there will be
even fewer opportunities for interactions many challenges in implementing this sort
with “wilderness”-type settings. Wilderness of program. First of all, very few provinces
settings differ from park or park-like settings support outdoor education at the provincial
found in urban areas in their degree of level. Of the 13 provinces and territories,
management. Parks are much more heavily only three have stand-alone outdoor
managed, often involving manicured lawns education curriculum—Alberta, New
and purpose-planted trees and shrubs. Brunswick and the Northwest Territories
Wilderness settings are very minimally (Joyce, 2010). The rationale for New
managed and tend to evoke an “untouched” Brunswick’s secondary-level course, Outdoor
atmosphere. Parks are indeed valuable Pursuits 110, is to “provid[e] the opportunity
places, but wilderness areas are special to address growing public concern for our
and represent a more natural ecosystem precious natural resources, while at the same
and can only exist apart from dense human time providing students the opportunity to
settlement. We need to, as educators, work experience outdoor recreational activities”
to give every child the opportunity to (New Brunswick, 1995, p. 1). However,
not only experience natural places but to although this course seems to address many
meaningfully engage with them. In so doing, important issues and would be valuable for
we can work to communicate the myriad all students to take, very few in fact do. For
reasons why these places are important and example, over the past three years (2007–
worth preserving. 2010), less than 1.5% of New Brunswick high
school students enrolled in Outdoor Pursuits
To do so, we must make these engagements 110.
relevant. Although they must be specific
to their place, programs should explore Secondly, there are very few programs in
the relationships between places and how faculties of education that train outdoor
they have changed over time. Discovering educators, and those that exist are regionally
how the city, countryside and forests focused in Ontario. If we desire to implement
interact will help make the more distant place-based outdoor education programs,
places meaningful to those who have little it would be valuable for teachers to be
opportunity to experience and understand trained in the region in which they would be
the intrinsic value of wilderness areas. teaching. Thirdly, liability and legal concerns
They can also explore how humans alter make it difficult for those teachers with an
the landscape to create rural, suburban and interest in taking their students outside to
S
urban places, to demonstrate that we are able do so. As a whole, in this era of international
Y
A to affect change and the direction in which economic competition, our school systems
W
that change takes place. do not readily value outdoor education
H
T programs. But we can work to change that.
A
P Most importantly, place-based outdoor
education programs should be about the So, we as educators need to work to
30
creation of home, “the foundation of our introduce our students to the places in which
Sense of Place
they live. We then need to encourage them Foran, A. (2005). The experience of
to find the connections between their selves pedagogic intensity in outdoor
and their places in addition to fostering education. The Journal of Experiential
an understanding of their connections to Education, 28(2), 147–163.
others and other people’s places. We need
to show students how we are connected Joyce, K. (2010). Leaving the classroom
to the land and to each other through the and creating a nation: The role
land. As citizens, we need to encourage of the “wilderness” in Canadian
governments to incorporate place-based outdoor education. (Unpublished
outdoor education programs into the undergraduate thesis). Mount
curriculum, not only because of its potential Allison University, Sackville, New
for nation-building in community-starved Brunswick.
times but also because we need to encourage
attachment to the land in order to save the New Brunswick Department of Education.
land. We need to understand the Canadian (1995). Outdoor Pursuits 110.
landscape as our home, open to all who Fredericton, New Brunswick.
inhabit it.
Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness.
References London: Pion Ltd.
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Katherine Joyce is an MA student at Ontario
Reflections on the origin and spread Institute for Studies in Education (OISE)/
of nationalism (revised ed.). New University of Toronto studying history of
York: Verso. education. This article is based on work
completed as part of her undergraduate honours
Brookes, A. (2002). Lost in the Australian thesis at Mount Allison University.
bush: Outdoor education as
curriculum. Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 34(4), 405–425.
S
Y
A
W
H
T
A
P
31