Research & Development
First hand experiences at City Farms. 1996
Lecture by Prof. Dr. Marjan Margadant-van Arcken,
The Chair of Environmental Education, The University of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Delivered at the European Federation of City Farms Conference in Maastricht, the Netherlands in 1996
Introduction
I have divided my lecture into three parts.
- Firstly, to present some results of my research on the relationship between young children and animals.
- Secondly, to discuss nature images and nature experiences of children and adolescents.
- Thirdly, to talk about some didactical implications for environmental education based on nature experience at city farms.
The Relationship Between Young Children and Animals
The research project on the relationship between young children and animals was carried out in five kindergartens: an urban school in an old harbour district, a suburban school, a village school, a school in an urbanised provincial town, and a special school for handicapped children. About 250 children were involved in the study. The children were four to six years old and occasionally three to eight years old. The kindergartens were visited daily during a three weeks period, or visited monthly during a year.
During each visit, an animal was introduced to the children. The animals included two Cairn terriers, two British Blue cats, a guinea pig, a small rabbit, two white mice, a wormery and earthworms, a vivarium with grasshoppers, a pygmy kid goat, two cockerels and two chicks.
Each day started with a group discussion. The children were encouraged to react spontaneously, to ask questions and to talk about their own experiences with animals. The conversations were tape recorded. Following the group discussion, the children were allowed to play with the animals in small groups. Notes were taken during these free play situations and extensively transcribed later in a research journal. During the project, the children also visited a city farm.
During the research, it became clear that the meeting of a child with an unknown animal has a more or less structured pattern, consisting of three stages:
- Getting to know the animal,
- Building a trust relationship, and
- The consolidation of the trust relationship.
Stage 1.
The child‘s initial attitude was somewhat fearful; only very young toddlers run over to a strange animal without hesitation. Children usually approach the animal carefully, take a quick look at it, and then touch or stroke the animal‘s back. They never immediately touch an animal‘s head. This basic approach continues as the relationship develops.
Once children are completely at ease with the animal, they lose their fear. In the case of dogs, cats, guinea pigs, rabbits, and goats, the same question always directly followed the first careful stroke along the back of the strange animal: "What is its name?" This is an essential question for children, who approach these animals as individuals and not as nameless representatives of the species. In the case of the mice, it took on average, a half-hour before the question arose. In the case of the cockerels and chicks, only a few children asked about their names, and only one girl asked for the names of the grasshoppers. Nobody asked about the names of the earthworms.
There seems to be a down curve in the child‘s perception of an animal as an individual, ranging from the bigger mammals down to the smaller species of insects and worms. To a four year old, fantasy and toy animals all belong to the realm of animals. Fish, birds, and insects are not seen as animals. Presumably, for young children to recognise an animal as an animal, the animal‘s body has to have a certain resemblance to the human body.
Five and six year olds expel fantasy animals and toys from the animal kingdom, while they include fish and birds. The inclusion of insects, however, is still arbitrary. Our adult categorisation of animals as pets, wild animals, or livestock is strange to young children; instead, close observation shows that they use another categorisation.
In order of importance, the categories are: the safety factor, the stroking factor, and the play factor. Or in children‘s words: Is this animal dangerous? Can you stroke it? Can you play with it?
Stage 2.
A child gets to know a strange animal by doing something with it. Children of all ages stress the importance of play activities with animals. What you can do with an animal, however, depends to a large extent on the nature of the animal. The play activities of young children and animals therefore show considerable variety, such as walking around with the animal, showing the school to the animal and showing the animal to other people, feeding it, grooming it, playing with its toys, etc.
The amount of time required to develop a relationship of trust with an animal differs not only from child to child but also from animal to animal. It depends greatly on the size and the behaviour of the animal. Guinea pigs and rabbits, for instance, are allowed to walk around freely during the group conversations, and every child is allowed to hold them for a short while. Therefore, the children learn very quickly what they can and cannot expect of these animals. Animals that make unpredictable movements, on the other hand, are scary. In the case of the mice and the grasshoppers, I take great care to show the children that these animals do not usually run or jump so fast that they can get away.
Small animals are easier to handle for little children. This is also due to their motor development. At this age the lateralisation process has not yet been completed, (ability to use left and right hands/feet independently). They cannot hop because they cannot use their feet alternately. Their motor organisation is still exclusively symmetric. When young children pick up an animal, they do that with two hands on each side of the animal‘s back: left hand and right hand make the same movement. That is the reason why young children pick up an animal in such a clumsy way. They simply cannot do it the way we do. This motor development partly influences the child‘s fear of animals. When you are not that handy, it is even more difficult to hold a wriggly guinea pig.
Stage 3.
Once a relationship of trust has been established, the animal is allowed to share in the normal activities of the children. It becomes a part of their play in the doll‘s corner or when they set up tents. Children also dig holes in the sandbox or sand table and build houses for the animal. They often make these holes and houses too small. As soon as they try to fit in the animal, they see their mistake and say: "He looks like a giant," but they immediately make new, bigger ones and are very happy when the animals fits in and appears to enjoy sitting there.
By playing in this way, the child and the animal share one reality. For example, during a recess on the school playground, some children are digging in the sandbox. The dog sees this and also starts to dig. The children laugh about this and start digging again, but now like dogs. In this play activity, the dog understands the intentional meaning of the digging behaviour. Children and dog imitate each other. They share one reality, participate in one game, and give an analogic,(parallel), meaning to the activity. In another example Loes (age 6) is talking to the cat. The cat looks at her attentively. Of course, the cat does not understand the verbal meaning of the words, but she does understand that Loes is paying attention to her. The cat is a communication partner, because her attention gives the response: "I am here; you are there; I confirm your existence." Here, again, the child and the animal share one reality, one atmosphere and one mood.
In all these cases of shared activities, a fusion of horizons, (the limit of their experience of the world comes together), may be said to have occurred. Both a child and an animal live in symbiotic relation to their life worlds, which are enclosed by a meaningful horizon. Their life world extends to that horizon. By playing together, their life worlds merge into each other; their horizons melt together. Fusions of horizons are very rich and enunciated in the case of social animals. In the case of earthworms, however, it takes a lot for children to see the animal‘s perspective. But when they hear that earthworms like darkness and damp, they dig holes in the wormery and cover the earthworms with soil, behaviour that shows their understanding of earthworms.
My own conclusion from this study is that the fusion of horizons, based on a symbiotic understanding, is at the core of the relationship between a child and an animal. Playing together causes these fusions of horizons to occur, so it is strongly recommended to let the children play freely with animals, even in classroom conditions. It also stresses the value of educational programmes that emphasise direct contact and experimental involvement with animals.
Nature Images and Nature Experiences of Children and Adolescents
Now, I will discuss the nature images and nature experiences of 4 to 12 year old children and 13 to 18 year old teenagers. I visited five kindergartens. I also visited six primary schools monthly in the course of a year. During those visits, I took part in the nature education classes. The classroom discussions were tape recorded and I made observation notes of the children‘s work and behaviour. We also made some outdoor trips. As a final task, the 8 to 12 year old children wrote a free essay about outdoor experiences. 327 children were involved in the study. In the research project concerning 13 to 18 year old teenagers, I visited six schools during the weeks they spent in field study centres or nature conservation camps. During those weeks, I joined in all the daily activities. All these activities have been described in detail in a research journal. I interviewed a small group of students every day. These interviews were also tape recorded. In addition, I asked the students to take some photographs of the things they thought were important. Upon returning to school, they wrote an essay about their most important experiences. This research involved 263 students.
Nature Images
When you ask pupils and students: "What do you think of when you hear the word nature?", the same answer always follows: "Trees, forests, plants." These features symbolise green nature, which is evidently prototypic to their nature image. In a few cases, however, "animals" were named first and wild animals appeared in all summaries. Animals symbolise living nature. That is an important characteristic of the children‘s nature concept, because non living, or abiotic, nature creates the utmost confusion among pupils and students.
In very young children (4 to 6 years old) green nature is not yet alive because they think: if something doesn‘t move, it must be dead; if it moves, it is alive. Immobile grasshoppers, for instance, immediately provoke the question: "is he dead?" And blowing on a grasshoppers‘ cast off skin delivered the remark: "Now he jumps."
Green nature, such as trees and plants, does not move by itself; the autonomous movement of vegetation is not directly visible to the human eye. To young children, therefore, this part of nature is not alive. Among older children and adolescents, there is much confusion when you ask them whether soil, water, mountains or stones belong to nature. In such cases, children decide that it is nature when it can move or when it contains many plants and animals (the sea, for instance). Adolescents go a step further, they decide that abiotic elements belong to nature when these elements are conditional to living nature (the soil, for instance).
Still there remains a sharp boundary between living and non living nature. During fieldwork, this became painfully clear when students had to determine the biological and chemical water quality. The biological quality was measured by counting the total amount and the number of different water animals in a sample. The chemical quality was determined by doing some simple tests. In the student‘s perspective, they were not only doing totally different things, they did not see the connection between the two methods of measurement.
The same problem occurs, when you ask pupils and students: "What do you think of when you hear the word environment?" Children and adolescents answer that question with environmental problems, mainly pollution. Since the natural sciences have an enormous influence on the description of environmental problems, no wonder the student‘s environmental image is determined abiotically.
Here we are presented with a large problem for information and education: most of the children and adolescents have a biotic image of nature and an abiotic image of environment, with a sharp boundary between them. These pupils and students do not quite understand that nature and environment are tightly connected. I asked the pupils and students: "Do people belong to nature?" According to children, only people who are good for nature belong to it, for instance foresters or Greenpeace activists. But in general, people do not belong to nature. I expected adolescents to have second thoughts about this, but the opposite was true. According to them, foresters are not a part of nature because they drive diesel motor vehicles, which are bad for nature. What Greenpeace is doing is okay, but the activists do not belong to nature.
Of course, they know our body belongs to nature, but not people themselves; on the contrary: people are destroying nature. A small number of students think people can belong to nature when they live in harmony with it, for instance, old fashioned farmers or undisturbed Indians in the rain forest. Only those with an agricultural background think that farmers and farming belong to nature. I do not think this description of nature images is overstated. In my opinion, it is a serious task for education to try to soften the sharp boundaries between nature, environment and people.
Young children‘s view on nature
Children‘s nature experience shows a value taxonomy, (classification by value). To children, the most important and main value is inviting nature. Nature makes an inviting impression on children. You can perform all kinds of activities with nature: climb trees, jump ditches, build huts, gather flowers, play hide and seek, and so forth.
After this main value, the range of importance is as follows:
- Challenging nature, which is characterised by the experience of intense, vital exploration aimed at exciting nature aspects and the creation of thrilling adventures.
- Useful nature, which is divided into playable, edible, wholesome and nature as the supplier of raw materials. In this nature value, a specific child‘s culture mixed with old folklore remnants expresses itself. There are games with nature only children play. There are typical children‘s names for plants and little animals. They tell grand stories about plants and plant names, for instance about so called poison. Some plants are edible or carry sweets and some heal small wounds. Above all, nature offers playing material.
- Intriguing nature invites children to further inspect, track and spy. Based on their discoveries and experiences, children really like to know more about nature.
- Aesthetic nature is the experience of nature‘s beauty. Children of this age do not yet value the beauty of a landscape. They enjoy concrete things, such as brightly coloured flowers, horse chestnuts or a ladybug.
- Recreational nature is the aim of outdoor trips or the scenery of entertainment. For children, this nature value is characterised by "faraway nature". They depend on adults to get there. Once they arrive, the above mentioned values take over.
Adolescents‘ view on nature
Before I discuss the adolescent‘s nature experience, I would like you to notice the ranking place of aesthetic nature in children‘s experience. For adolescents, aesthetic nature is the main nature value. That means a beautiful landscape view or a nice part of nature. If this value is not present, all the other values will not follow. Aesthetic nature is a conditional value.
Adolescents‘ motivation to move about nature can be placed on a continuum with tranquillity seekers on the one side and activity seekers on the other. This continuum is surrounded by two fields: nature in the background, which means nature as scenery, and nature in the foreground, which means nature as the attention getter. I have some typical examples of each:
On the one side: The mountain biker is an activity seeker, who consciously chooses a beautiful landscape for biking. However, nature forms the background, or even the underground, for his activity. Something special has to occur, for instance the appearance of a fox, before nature becomes the focus of attention. The bird watcher also is also an activity seeker, but with nature in the foreground. Bird watchers often plan their movements in nature carefully in order to spot special birds.
On the opposite side, I placed the courting couple. Adolescents often fall in love. In interviews, they tell me they like to make long walks with their boy or girlfriend. Sometimes, other participants say: "But then you aren‘t interested in nature." The first speaker defends him or herself by saying: "O yes, one goes there for peace and freedom." In this case, nature fits the mood of love.
I placed united with nature by tranquillity seekers whereby nature is in the foreground. Adolescents look to nature to forget their concerns, find peace with themselves and feel united with the surrounding nature. The presented scheme is not of static, but a dynamic composure. Individuals may tend more towards tranquillity or to activity, but the motivation to seek nature out can change each day. One day, one looks for peace and relaxation, the next day one goes for activity. Also, the fact that nature can be in the background or in the foreground not only changes from day to day, but even from minute to minute. For instance: you take a walk; one moment your thoughts are in the foreground; the next moment, the surrounding nature takes first place.
A great many adolescents enter an educational activity with nature in the background as their basic attitude. By means of the educational material, nature becomes the focus of attention. Many times however, the material does not fit the students‘ interest. By the shift of attention, they want to know more about animals and healing or edible plants. At that moment, please, forget all the scientifically oriented stuff and tell them great stories about plants and animals.
Didactical Implications
I want to shift attention to the education at city farms. Let me first give you an example:
At the city farm, a teacher asks: "Why do animals walk around?" "To see other children," five year old Fatima says. That‘s the wrong answer. "To see other animals," Jurman (age 5) tries. Wrong again. No one knows the correct answer. "To find food," the teacher says at last. But the children don‘t react; the answer lies beyond their horizon.
Fatima‘s answer is typical for a young child. When young children give an explanation for the meaning of animal behaviour why an animal does something they see it from their own perspective. Jurman‘s answer reflects more understanding of the animal‘s point of view. The teacher‘s answer, however, reflects a mechanistic, biological approach that is completely alien to the young child‘s way of thinking. Consequently, these children do not react, whereas older children probably would.
Such experiences made me develop a didactical scheme that integrates the children‘s nature experiences and way of thinking in the learning process. The scheme consists of three phases:
- A preparation phase,
- An activity phase,
- An integration phase.
1. Preparation Phase
The preparation phase starts with a group conversation about a certain subject; say, for instance, "Ducks in spring". The children are encouraged to tell what they know about the subject. By doing so, past experiences come to life again. For example, Susan (8 years) tells about the time she and her family were visiting aunt Jane:
"I was six, I believe, and Jochem and Tamara were also there. We were allowed to take out the dog. His name is Spotty. In the park, he may walk around freely. At the bushes, he started to snuffle and bark. We then discovered a nest between the shrubs. There were seven eggs in it. The mother duck was scared off by Spotty, we think. We wanna feel if the eggs were still warm. "Don‘t do that," Tamara said: "As the mother will smell us, she‘ll be so frightened she stops hatching." Still, Jochem did it. We were very angry. We always quarrel with Jochem, always. Then we don‘t want him to come with us. But my aunt says we are the eldest. Also, I wanna say: sometimes, there are boys who smash eggs. And rats eat eggs and ducklings." In the next story, Elise tells about the same kind of experiences with rough boys who smash eggs. And she tells she heared about blowing out eggs, but doesn‘t know what it is. In the next story, Elise tells about the same kind of experiences with rough boys who smash eggs. And she tells she heared about blowing out eggs, but doesn‘t know what it is.
These stories are very suited to investigate not only what the children already know, but also what they want to learn, since these stories contain all kinds of questions. The just mentioned duck stories of only two children contain the following questions:
- Do ducks lay seven eggs, most of the time? Or do they lay more, or less?
- Are dogs dangerous for ducks?
- Are children and adults dangerous for ducks?
- How warm are hatched eggs?
- Is it true that you should never touch the eggs, because the mother will smell it and stop hatching?
- Is it true that rats eat eggs and ducklings?
- What is blowing out eggs? Who does it and why?
Perhaps, you think it very difficult to listen to these stories and at the same time investigate the hidden questions. I bet you all can do it. I have another example of this same class about ducks in spring. But now the children introduce spontaneously environmental problems. I shall tell you the story and I am sure you will discover the hidden questions. After telling the story, I shall ask for them.
Patrick (also 8 years) tells he saw signs in the Florisditch, that say: "Do not feed, batalism danger." "Those are shoes," a girl shouts. Great hilarity. For a moment, Patrick is embarrassed and admits he doesn‘t know what it means. But according to him, it is caused by environmental pollution. The teacher gives the correct name: "Botulism," and adds: "Indeed, that has to do with pollution. You are not allowed to swim there, because you will fall ill. So, don‘t go for a swim if you see a sign like that." The class goes on with the ducks feather and the fat gland‘s crucial function. Suddenly, a girl says emotionally: "Because of the oil they secretly dump in the sea, the birds get fouled and they die." "Alaska," a classmate says (it is just after the disaster with the oil tanker Exxon Valdez). And another: "They try to clean them, the gulls. I feel very sorry when I see it. Most of the time, they still die. Most of the time, they do." "For the North Sea, there are ships that clean oil stains; they sucker it up, or something like that" another child knows. Then, the teacher makes the class concentrate on the ducks again.
Well, you see what can happen during a class about ducks in spring and how easy it is to soften the sharp boundaries between biotic nature and abiotic environment. But now I want to know what questions you discovered in the story.
Let‘s go back to the didactical scheme. The preparation phase started with a group conversation and the investigation of what the children already know and what they want to learn about the subject. Because so many things pass by during group conversations, it is necessary to frame the subject. At the end of the preparation phase, it must be crystal clear to every one what the class‘ subject is and what questions will be treated. Or in other words: what do we want to know and how does the class contribute to it?
2. Activity Phase
The activity phase can consist of all kinds of activities: fieldwork, helping or working at the farm, small investigations or filling in questionnaires. When the children work with self raised questions, for instance the questions from the group conversation, then the learning activity will not only fit perfectly their nature experience and way of thinking but will also enlarge and deepen them. However, when children work with questions you already prepared, be aware of the danger of too many questions in too little time. It is better to do less questions but more in depth, than many questions superficially. I know the inclination to do as many things as possible during a class‘ visit to the city farm. But that will give you poor learning results. When the children work with one or more animals, be sure there is enough time for the children to build at least the beginning of a trust relationship with the animals. To say all this in only a few words, I advise you: To Take Your Time!
3. Integration Phase
The integration phase is the often forgotten follow up of a visit to the city farm when you can harvest the learning results; or in other words: the rewards for all your efforts. The integration phase starts with a group conversation about the children‘s experiences with the activities. Next, the conversation will lead to the question: "What did we learn today?" Many times, the answers will take the following form: "I never knew that ..., but now I know ..." Furthermore, it is important that each child make a personal working out of its own learning experience. That can be a drawing, a poem, a song, a part of an exhibition, or an essay. This personal working out is necessary for the integration of the new learning experience in the child’s already existing personal knowledge structure. Otherwise, the visit to the city farm will pass by as only a pleasant outing without learning results. However, this personal working out can be done upon returning to school.
Perhaps, you now think I am a strict educator. But I can assure you working this way can be great fun and very rewarding!
The research projects were financed among others by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries.