Sign up for our Free newsletter
Subscribe
Un-Subscribe
 


 

 

Taking Our Children and Future Generations Seriously:  Some Australian Views of Education and the Future  
 
By:      DR. FRANK HUTCHINSON
, University of Western Sydney, Australia

  For:      University of York, Educational Studies Seminar Series, June 22, 1999.

  Summary:

Drawing upon new research and new educational thinking, this paper invites discussion of some salient educational questions.  Often heard goals of education relate to ‘meeting our children’s needs’, ‘responsible citizenship’ and ‘equipping students for the future’.  Yet, what do such goals mean in a practical sense?  How much actual attention is given to a ‘futures dimension’ in the curriculum?  How much consideration is given to the needs not only of this generation but future generations?  How seriously do we value what young people are saying about the future?  How might we enhance the quality of our responses to unmet student needs?  How might we begin to contribute more effectively to building cultures of peace and sustainable futures?

             No easy answers are given to these challenging questions but a range of practical suggestions is offered, including  ideas for classroom practice from my book Educating Beyond Violent Futures, (Routledge, London, 1996) and the latest World Yearbook of Education (Kogan Page, London, 1998) on the theme of ‘Futures Education.’

1.             ‘Preparing students for the future’

One of the central roles of education is commonly regarded as ‘preparing students for the future’. Yet, what is meant by this?  Are there taken-for-granted ways of looking at the future that rebound on what we do or do not do in the present? Are there often colonising or culturally violent images of what might be? The road to freedom is a long one, as suggested by Nelson Mandela (1994), but how do we learn to walk in our schools, our societies and as a species in ways that display more foresight, more compassion and more solidarity?  How do we learn to walk in ways that combine freedom with responsibility and lessen the prospects for violent, foreclosed futures?  

2.             The idea of intergenerational equity

It was Gandhi who remarked that there is enough for everyone's needs but not everyone's greed.  If there is to be an extension of this principle to unborn generations, what does this imply?  Is a paradigm shift towards less violent and more inclusive ways of intergenerational caring likely?  Are there practical contributions that our teachers and schools may make to a new global ethic?   Or is this merely a pipe-dream?

As a peace educator, environmental educator and critical futurist, I am the first to admit that the obstacles to any such shift are considerable.  After all, there is a powerful push of the past.  Business-as-usual practices often hide the real environmental and social costs of enterprises, especially on children, women, the poor and the natural environment.  Such culturally myopic practices are defined in mainstream economic theory as 'externalities'  Attendant risks may be obscured as to how the futures of unborn generations are being mortgaged.  Rather than attempting constructively to deal with trends in violence, such as the 2 million children who have been killed in wars over the past decade or the increased pace of environmental destruction, we may assume  such trends are destiny.  Rather than prudential care and applied foresight, there may be the blind pursuit of short term goals that ignores the interests of the 'two-thirds world' and of generations to come.  Rather than working together to help build a better world, in which unborn generations have the possibility to live, to laugh, to play, to share, to care and to transform conflicts non-violently, we may fatalistically accept a foreclosed future.  Rather than building intergenerational partnerships, the well being of children today and of successive generations may be stolen or colonized through our lack of quality responses. 

3.             The needs of future generations: a neglected dimension in the school curriculum?

It has been commented that much of what happens in our schools is about driving into the future whilst looking in the rear vision mirror.  This metaphor has been extended to picturing our young people as, in many cases, crash victims of  'future shock'.  Even if we question the cynical nature of this comment, we may see some truth in its claims to describe reality and potential reality.

Yet, is the situation more complex and open?  Even if there is taken-for-granted knowledge about 'perpetual' trends in direct, structural and ecological forms of violence, are there opportunities for resistance?  Admittedly, there are some powerful cultural myths, particularly from Western selective traditions about ‘drivers of history’, but are they the full story?  (see table 1.1)

Notwithstanding foreclosed images or guiding metaphors about our schools and other social organisations, are there site-specific opportunities for our teachers and teacher educators to become practical futurists?  Are there opportunities for choice and engagement in helping to build cultures of peace and environmentally sustainable futures?  Are there opportunities for civic engagement in our schools and other social organisations to challenge narrow notions of education and citizenship that fail to take seriously our children’s rights and the needs of future generations?  (see Table 1.2).

Table 1.1

Drivers of History:
some major cultural myths

Perceived driver

Related educational assumptions

1.             Economics.

Economic reductionist (e.g. schools driven by market imperatives; schools as businesses, Smithian ‘hidden hand’)

2.             Technology

Technological determinist (e.g. technologically driven change shaping schools, society and the future; ‘future shock’ adjustment)

3.             Genes

Biological determinist (e.g. genetic causality claimed for the origins of warfare; humans chained by their genetic inheritance to be aggressive; neo-social-Darwinist assumptions about schools, society and the future; racist histories)

4.             Population

Demographic reductionist (e.g. neo-Malthusian, eco-sexist and eco-racist geographies)

5.             War

Militarist and violence-condoning world-views (e.g. racist histories, gendered histories, narrowly nationalistic histories)

6.             God / Divine Plan / Fate

Eschatological / metaphysical reductionist  (e.g. fatalism rather than active citizenship; salvation dependent upon divine intervention rather than human agency)

7.             Globalisation

Images of Western-centric destiny (e.g. global reach of Western idea of progress and Western models of development; yet, do these influential accounts neglect reflexivity and resistance, including movements of ‘grassroots’ globalism?)

 

Table 1.2 

Educating for Future Citizens:
Narrow and broad approaches

 

National civics

Global civics

Axioms

Hypotheses

·        Rights and duties as sanctioned by nation state.

·        Rights and duties as sanctioned under both national law and emergent international law (e.g. UN Convention on the Rights of Children).

·        Children’s rights narrowly defined.  Children as dependents.

·        Children’s rights broadly defined.  Towards cultures of partnership.

·        Democracy narrowly defined.  Learning about democratic institutions.  Passive rather than active citizenship.

·        Democracy broadly defined.  Learning about and for democratic participation at all levels (e.g. negotiating classroom rules).

·        Literacy narrowly defined
(e.g. back-to-basics).

·        Literacy broadly defined
(e.g. environmental literacy, conflict resolution literacy, multimedia literacy, global political literacy).

·        Sustainability narrowly defined.

·        Sustainability broadly defined.

·        Peace narrowly defined (negative peace).

·        Peace broadly defined (positive peace).

·        Responsibility narrowly defined (e.g. ‘national self-interest’ utility values).

·        Responsibility broadly defined (e.g. emergent ethical concerns with global responsibility and ‘the needs of future generations’).

·        Solidarity narrowly defined (‘national citizenship’ values and nationalistic solidarity).

·        Solidarity broadly defined (‘global citizenship’ values and intergenerational solidarity).

 

4.       Rethinking the values we associate with the younger generation

If ‘meeting the needs of present and future generations’ is to be much more than a pious dream, then arguably there are major social policy implications such as the following:

¼Young people must have their perspectives taken seriously.  Every young person is entitled to the respect of others and to the recognition of their inherent worth and dignity as human beings.  This demands that there be systematic institutional support and material resources committed to this end ... (Wyn & White, 1997, p.148).

How we value what young people are saying about the future becomes in such a context an important consideration.  Yet, in our constructions of ‘childhood’, ‘youth’ and ‘the future’, how much regard do we give to what the younger generation is saying about the future?  How much active listening do we do?  How much empathy do we give?  How much foresight and solidarity do we display?  Are there aspects of cultural violence involved in the ways in which we listen, or neglect to listen, to what young people are saying?  Whether as parents, teachers, youth workers, health care professionals or concerned citizens, is there a challenge to move beyond stereotyping, commodifying and colonising in our intergenerational relations? (see Tables 1.3 and 1.4). 

4.1     Young people's views of the future:  Are we actively listening?

Study of young people's views of the future has been for a long time a low priority area as evidenced by the comparative dearth of published research evidence other than of a more anecdotal and often stereotypic variety in the popular media.  Over the years, there has been a relative neglect of the views of both the older generation and the younger generation about personal, local and global futures, except in the narrow or short time-frame sense of opinion polling for forthcoming elections and diagnosis of the hopes and fears of 'the elusive youth market' by advertising agencies. Even among the more academic

Table 1.3

 

 

 

 

Young People’s Voices on the Future:
how well do we value what they say?

 

Some Conventional Reactions

Example Value Assumptions

 

1.         Dollar calculating

“Youth market’

 

2.         Dumping

‘Moral panics’ by older generation

 

3.         Decontextualising

Leaving invisible power relations (e.g. social class, gender)

 

4.         Deliverance-seeking technologies

Technofixes (e.g. v-chip, ‘computers in the classroom’)

 

5.         Doctoring

Medicalizing ‘youth problem’

 

6.         Demonizing

Criminalizing ‘youth problem’

 

7.         Denying active citizenship and active hope

Passive citizenship

 

 

 

Table 1.4

 

 

 

Young People’s Voices on the Future:
how well do we value what they say?

Some Alternative Responses

Example Value Preferences

1.         Resisting commodification

Critical consumer literacy

2.         Responding compassionately

Active listening

3.         Rethinking contexts

Partnership rather than paternalism

4.         Reapraising ‘technical fixes’

More holistic approaches, multimedia literacies

5.         Refuting medicalisation

Participation

6.         Reaffirming shared humanity

Building non-violent futures

7.         Respecting the rights and needs of present and future generations

Active citizenship

 

research, the quality has been distinctly uneven.  With some of the latter, there has been a lack of critical awareness of issues of gender, ageism and Western-centrism, as well as a tendency to decontextualize and psychologize young people's dilemmas about their social worlds and the future (Hutchinson, 1998).

Worrying trends in adolescent male homicide rates and in youth suicide rates in late industrial societies such as the US and Australia, will not be adequately responded to, for example, by psychologizing them and ‘worrying less’ but by quality responses.   In Australia since the 1960’s, rates of suicide per 100,000 head of population show the rate of young male suicide has almost trebled.  Over the same period the rate of young female suicide has doubled (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs, 1997).

Whether in the US, Australia or elsewhere, the promise of 'learned optimism' for the young in meeting life's crises is an exaggerated one.  It assumes a level playing field.  In pursuing the goal of a psychological prophylactic, attention can be easily diverted from highly damaging scores made against educational budgets and social infrastructure, including child and youth support services.  According to a recent international study of eighteen late industrial societies, the safety nets for young people are weakest in the US with Australia a disturbingly close second (UNICEF 1996, p.45). 

4.2     Researching the young: contrasting approaches

The beginnings of systematic research on young people's anticipations of the future may be traced to the early 1950s.  During that period Gillespie and Allport (1955) carried out a cross-cultural study of young people from several different countries.  Surveyed in the early years of the Cold War, most of the youth respondents were found to be pessimistic as to the possibility of a third world war being averted during their lifetimes.

However, with a few notable exceptions such as Elise Boulding's study during the 1970s of New Hampshire school children (Boulding, 1995), it has not been until recent times that studies have occurred with an explicit interest in educational implications, and that have been more open to new ideas from areas of cross-disciplinary inquiry, such as peace research, gender studies, environmental studies and futures studies.  Some of this newer research on young people's perceptions of the future has been inspired by more critical methodological approaches to researching the views of adults about the future.  Important examples of the latter are the World Images 2000 Project (Ornauer et al., 1976) and the Ontario 2000 project (Livingstone, 1976).

The more innovative of the latest studies of child and youth futures point to possible new ways forward.  With these studies, there is a highlighting of the need to explore the notion of ‘futures’ and associated concepts such as 'broadened social literacies', 'resources of hope' and 'young people's empowerment', rather than focussing more narrowly on student attitudes via their concerns for the future.  Epistemologically, there is a shift from an interest in 'predictive or forecasting values' to 'proactive or applied foresight values'.

Exemplifying the 'predictive values' style of research are time-lag studies, such as those by Kleiber et al. (1993), that replicate the pioneering work of Gillespie and Allport (1955) and seek to identify trends in young people's views of the future.  Illustrating the newer style of research are studies such as Hutchinson (1993, 1996b),  Hicks and Holden (1995) and Gidley (1997).  With the latter, the interest is not so much in identifying whether there are trends of increased pessimism or a rising 'sense of meaningless' among young people but in challenging assumptions that trends are destiny:

…Images of the future in the Western World often hinge narrowly around scientific and technological developments, sometimes seen as beneficial but more often as dystopian.  It is as if science and technology have a life of their own which the ordinary citizen feels she can neither understand nor control   In the face of such fears it is increasingly important to focus on people's images of preferred futures.  If they can be elaborated and envisioned more then perhaps they can provide the basis for creating a more just and sustainable future (Hicks & Holden, 1995, p. 51). 

4.3     Researching the young: beyond ‘predictive values’

To illuminate this proposition further, it is worthwhile briefly describing some relevant research projects.  Whilst influenced by Ornauer et al. (1976) in the design of a questionnaire instrument, the 'Futures Consciousness and the School' Project received much more significant inspiration from the work of Galtung (1988) on dialogue techniques in researching and Boulding (1988) and Ziegler (1989) on 'imaging futures' workshops.  The research involved 650 Australian secondary students.  It entailed a stratified sample of government and Catholic systemic schools from rural and urban areas, and had a representative mix in terms of gender and socio-economic background.  A one in four systematic sample of students from the original sample was invited to participate in small-group dialogue sessions and futures workshops.  The full text of the questionnaire is contained in Hutchinson (1993).  An  outline of the procedures for the small group dialogues and futures workshops is given in Hutchinson (1993, 1996b).

The study identified a number of major themes among young people's concerns about the world and for the future.  They included a depersonalised and uncaring world; a violent world, and a world divided between 'haves' and 'have nots'.  Other major concerns related to a mechanised world of largely oppressive technological change; an environmentally unsustainable world, and a politically corrupt and deceitful world.

In addition, the study was very much interested with exploring young people's preferable futures.  A number of significant themes emerged from the small group dialogues and futures workshop activities.  First, there was found to be a strong strand of technocratic dreaming in which techno-fix solutions to many life crises tend to be accepted very uncritically.  Such ways of imaging the future were usually stronger among boys than girls.  Secondly, there was social imaging related to a demilitarization and 'greening' of science and technology to meet genuine human needs.  Girls rather than boys in their imaging capacities were found to be more responsive in this respect.  Thirdly, there were images concerned with intergenerational equity, as well as with a perceived imperative for greater acceptance of our responsibilities for the needs of future generations.  Fourthly, there was an important strand in imaging concerned with making peace with people and planet through reconceptualisations of both ethics and lifestyles.  Finally, there was a strongly expressed need among many young people about preferred futures in education.  When invited to consider whether there is any point in visualizing an improved world for the twenty-first century, a majority of the student respondents were of the opinion that better opportunities in schools to imagine preferable futures are crucial for choice and engagement.  Large majorities of both male and female students indicated their support for learning proactive skills in schools, such as ecological literacy and conflict resolution literacy (Hutchinson, 1996b, 1997b).

Although smaller in scope, a follow-up study by Gidley (1997) has confirmed many of Hutchinson's findings.  However, Gidley's work places particular emphasis on schools as sites of authentic possibility.  Her preliminary findings suggest that many young people, who have been through a Steiner system of education, are more likely to feel confident about being able to contribute in practical ways to shifting away from their feared futures toward their preferred futures.  She speculates on possible lessons for more conventional forms of education.

Another illustration may be given with the 'Visions of the Future' Project conducted by Hicks and Holden (1995).  Based on a study of 400 UK children aged 7 to 18, this innovative project both complements the findings of a number of earlier studies and moves beyond them in some respects.  It brings out particularly clearly variables associated with age and gender, together with raising important questions of choice and engagement by teachers, teacher educators and schools.

Some of the project's findings may be summarized as follows:  First, age is a significant variable in terms of optimism and pessimism.  Among the children surveyed, it was found that older children were more likely to be pessimistic in their assumptions about global futures than younger children.  Secondly, in relation to feared futures a number of salient issues are likely to stand out in relation to the global problématique.  In the case of UK children these related to violence and war in the twenty-first century, with concerns about the environment also high.  Thirdly, whilst girls are generally less likely to be optimistic about the future than boys, they are also less likely to embrace uncritically technocratic dreaming or 'glamorous high-tech solutions to everything'.  Finally, the project discovered that whilst some young people feel confident to act on a personal level to help create a better future, for many the social or political literacy skills are lacking.  At the same time, it was found that many young people acknowledged such a need and would like more information, discussion and advice within schools in ways of making hope practical. 

5        Challenges and opportunities for quality responses

A crucial aspect of a forward-thinking approach to education is the value we attach to actively listening to young people's hopes and fears for the future:

             The images that young people have of the future will help to shape their aspirations as adult citizens in the next century.  It is important, therefore, that appropriate attention be paid to their views and to the sort of education that is needed to prepare them more effectively for the future.  This is a timely task for educators as we approach the new millennium - a time of transition which can be used to prompt deeper reflection on beginnings and endings, directions and purposes (Hicks, 1996, p.143). 

If we are to enhance the prospects of moving in the twenty-first century towards more peaceful cultures and more sustainable ways of living, it is important to encourage foresight and to actively listen to our young people’s voices on the future.  In too many cases our young people’s hopes and fears are put at a severe discount, with a failure to address their concerns responsibly and in empowering ways.  Their hopes and dreams may be marginalized and the need for an explicit futures dimension in the curriculum may remain forgotten.  Relatedly, if our young people’s images of the future are discounted, this probably tells quite a lot about ourselves, our schools, our societies and our expectations and aspirations not only for the younger generation but for unborn generations (Eckersley, 1997).

Whether in relation to our schools or other social institutions, the challenges for quality responses to young people’s voices on the future are great.  There are, however, significant opportunities for choice and engagement in taking young people’s needs much more seriously than at present.  Notwithstanding many negative trends, there are contradictions and opportunities to build solidarities across the generations and a developing sense of a global civic society.  A vital challenge for ourselves as educators is whether we not only acknowledge major difficulties but begin to ‘walk our talk’ in ways that combine freedom with responsibility and resist impoverished, violent social futures for our students and successive generations (Hutchinson, 1996 a,b, 1997 a,b, 1998).

REFERENCES

Boulding, E (1988) Building a Global Civic Culture: education for an interdependent world, New York: Teachers' College Press, Columbia University.

Boulding, E (1995) How children see their world and make their future, in Boulding, E and Boulding K, (eds) The Future: images and processes, London: Sage.

Eckersley, R (1997)  Portraits of youth: understanding young people’s relationship to the future, Futures  29 (3), 243-50.

Galtung, J (1988) Methodology and development, Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers.

Giddens, A (1991)  Modernity and Self-Identity: self and society in the late modern age, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Gidley, J (1997) Imagination and will in youth visions of their futures, MA (research) in Education, Lismore, Australia: Southern Cross University.

Gillespie, J and Allport, G (1955)  Youth's Outlook on the Future: A cross-national study, New York:  Double Day & Co.

Hicks, D (1996)  Young peoples' hopes and fears for the future, in Slaughter, R (ed) The Knowledge Base of Futures Studies vol 2. Melbourne: Futures Study Centre.

Hicks, D and Holden, C (1995)  Visions of the Future: why we need to teach for tomorrow, Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.

House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Affairs (1997) Aspects of Youth Suicide, Canberra: Australian Governnment Publishing Service.

Hutchinson, F (1993)  Futures consciousness and the school, PhD, Armidale, Australia: University of New England.

Hutchinson, F (1996b) Educating Beyond Violent Futures, London: Routledge.

Hutchinson, F (1997a)  Education for future generations: challenges and opportunities for peace and environmental educators, Future Generations Journal, no. 23, (special issue dedicated to 'peace and future generations' theme), 10-15.

Hutchinson, F (1997b)  Our children's futures: are there lessons for environmental educators?  Environmental Education Research 3 (2), 189-202.

Hutchinson, F (1998)   Young people’s hopes and fears for the future, in D. Hicks & R. Slaughter, (eds) World Yearbook of Education 1998 Futures Education, London:  Kogan Page.

Livingstone (1976)  Intellectual and popular images of the educational future in an advanced industrial society, Canadian Journal of Education 1 (2), 13-29.

Mandela, N (1994) Long Walk to Freedom,  London: Little, Brown & Co.

Mead, M (1970) Culture and Commitment: a study of the generation gap, New York: Natural History Press.

Ornauer, H, Wiberg, H, Sicinsk, A and Galtung, J (eds) (1976)  Images of the World in the Year 2000, Monton, in assoc. with the European Coordination Centre for Research & Documentation in Social Sciences: The Hague.

UNICEF (1996)  The Progress of Nations, New York: UNICEF.

Wyn, J and White, R (1997) Rethinking Youth, St Leonards: Allen & Unwin.

Ziegler, W (1989)  Envisioning the Future: a mindbook of exercises for futures inventions, Denver: Futures-Invention Associates.

Notes on Contributor 

FRANK HUTCHINSON is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Western Sydney, Australia,  in the Faculty of Social Inquiry.  Previously, he has worked as a curriculum consultant at both the primary and secondary school levels in areas of social literacy and alternatives to violence.  His main research and teaching interests relate to issues concerned with young people and educating for more peaceful, socially just and environmentally sustainable futures.  He did his PhD on the topic  Futures Consciousness and the School (University of New England, Australia, 1993).  He is the author, co author or contributing author of several books on futures education.  These works include: People Problems and Planet Earth (Melbourne: Macmillan, 1982, 2nd edition 1986), Educating for Peace (Canberra: Curriculum Development Centre, 1986), Educating for a Fairer Future (Sydney: Geography Teachers’ Association & WDTC, 1988), Our Planet and its People (Melbourne: Macmillan, 1992), Education beyond Hatred and Fatalism (Malmö, Sweden: School of Education, Lund University, 1994), New Thinking for a New Millennium (London: Routledge, 1996), Educating Beyond Violent Futures  (London: Routledge, 1996), and World Yearbook of Education: Futures education (London: Kogan Page, 1998).  He is a councillor of the Peace Education Commission and a member of the World Futures Studies Federation.

Correspondence: Faculty of Social Inquiry and Social Ecology, Locked Bag 1, University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, Richmond, NSW 2753, Australia.
E-mail:  f.hutchinson@uws.edu.au


Deliver your children's bright future by enrolling at the Thomas More College offering programs suited for student's talent and skills.