Animals “Я” Us: Egomorphism in/for Science and Environmental Education

in Society & Animals
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

We argue for the notion of egomorphism as an inexorable discursive element in/for children’s interspecies encounters mediated by nature interpreters. We do so by examining the discourses of a public environmental educator in Canada and a dolphin trainer in a marine park in Portugal while mediating such pedagogical experiences. Our analytical work contributes to expanding the understanding of how human–nonhuman interactions can create opportunities in science and environmental education to disrupt the notion that humans are superior and therefore removed from other animals.

Animals “Я” Us: Egomorphism in/for Science and Environmental Education

in Society & Animals

Sections

References

BeckL. & CableT. (2011). Expanding our interpretive perspectives. In Proceedings from Zoos Wildlife Parks and Aquaria InterpNET Conference.

BergerJ. (1980). About looking. London: Writers and Readers.

BergerP. & LuckmannT. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.

BergmanM. (2009). Peirce’s philosophy of communication. New York: Continuum.

CaterC. (2010). Any closer and you’d be lunch! Interspecies interactions as nature tourism at marine aquaria. Journal of Ecotourism9(2) 133-148.

CurryP. (2006). Ecological ethics: An introduction. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

DarwinC. (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London, UK: Murray.

De WaalF. (2016). Are we smart enough to know how smart animals are? New York: W. W. Norton.

DesmondJ. (1999). Staging tourism: Bodies on display from Waikiki to Sea World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

DohnN. (2011). Situational interest of high school students who visit an aquarium. Science Education95(2) 337-357.

EdwardsD. (2005). Discursive psychology. In K. Fitch and R. Sanders (Eds.) Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 257-273). London: Lawrence Elbaum.

ElliotN. (2006). Mediating nature. New York: Routledge.

FennellD. (2012). Tourism and animal ethics. New York: Routledge.

GendlinE. (1985). Crossing and dipping: Some terms for approaching the interface between natural understanding and logical formulation. Minds and Machines5(4) 547-560.

HabermasJ. (1987). Teoría de la acción comunicativa II: Crítica de la razón funcionalista. Madrid, Spain: Grupo Santillana de Ediciones.

Haluza-DeLayR. (2013). Educating for environmental justice. In R. StevensonM. BrodyJ. Dillon and A. Wals (Eds.) International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 394-403). New York: Routledge.

HeuerK. (Ed.). (2002). The lost notebooks of Loren Eiseley. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

IngoldT. (1992). The perception of environment. Essays on livelihood dwelling and skill. London, UK: Routledge.

JeffersonG. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.) Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-31). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins.

KohnE. (2013). How forests think: towards an anthropology beyond the human. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

LewontinR. C. (1982). Organism and environment. In H. C. Plotkin (Ed.) Learning development and culture (pp. 151-170). New York: Wiley.

LouvR. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.

MartusewiczR.EdmundsonJ. & LupinacciJ. (2011). Ecojustice education: Toward diverse democratic and sustainable communities. New York: Routledge.

McKibbenB. (1990). The end of nature. New York: Anchor Books.

MiltonK. (2002). Loving nature: towards an ecology of emotion. London, UK: Routledge.

MiltonK. (2005). Anthropomorphism or egomorphism? The perception of nonhuman persons by human ones. In J. Knight (Ed.) Animals in person: Cultural perspectives on human-animal intimacies (pp. 255-271). Oxford, UK: BERG.

Ministério da Educação e Ciência. (1991). Programa ciências da natureza: plano de organização do ensino-aprendizagem (Vol.II Ensino Básico 2o Ciclo). Lisboa, PT: Imprensa Nacional Casa da Moeda. Available at http://metasdeaprendizagem.dge.mec.pt/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/programa_C_Natureza_2Ciclo.pdf.

MonteiroR.CarrilloJ. & AguadedS. (2010). Teacher scripts in science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education26(6) 1269-1279.

MyersO. & SaundersC. (2002). Animals as links toward developing caring relationships with the natural world. In P. Kahn and S. Kellert (Eds.) Children and nature: Psychological sociocultural and evolutionary investigations (pp. 153-178). Cambridge, UK: MIT Press.

NevesJ. & MonteiroR. (2014). How full is your luggage? Background knowledge of zoo visitors regarding sharks. Environmental Education Research20(3) 291-312.

OakleyJ.WatsonG.RusselC.Cutter-MackenzieA.FawcettL.KuhlG.RusselJ.van der WaalM. & WarkentinT. (2010). Animal encounters in environmental education research: Responding to the “question of the animal”. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education1586-102.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2007). The Ontario curriculum grades 1-8: Science and technology. Toronto, ON: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

PalmerJ. & NealP. (1994). The handbook of environmental education. London, UK: Routledge.

PlumwoodV. (2002). Environmental culture: The ecological crisis of reason. New York: Routledge.

ReisG. & Guimaraes-IosifR. (2012). The death and life of a school-based environmental education and communication program in Brazil: Rethinking educational leadership and ecological learning. Applied Environmental Education and Communication11(3-4) 123-132.

ReisG. & RothW.-M. (2007). Environmental education in action: a discursive approach to curriculum design. Environmental Education Research13(3) 307-327.

ReisG.Ng-A-FookN. & GlitheroL. (2015). Provoking ecojustice: taking citizen science and youth activism beyond the school curriculum. In M. Mueller & D. Tippings (Eds.) Ecojustice citizen science and youth activism (pp. 39-61). New York: Springer.

SerpellJ. (2005). People in disguise: Anthropomorphism and human-pet relationship. In L. Daston and G. MitmanThinking with animals: New perspectives on anthropomorphism (pp. 121-136). NYC: USA: Columbia University Press.

ServaisV. (2005). Enchanting dolphins: An analysis of human-dolphin encounters. In J. Knight (Ed.) Animals in person: Cultural perspectives on human-animal Intimacies (pp. 211-229). New York: Berg.

SieglerR. S. & AlibaliM. W. (2005). Children’s thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

SternD. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant. New York: Basic Books.

SztybelD. (2008). Animals as persons. In J. Castricano (Ed.) Animal subjects: An ethical reader in a posthuman world (pp. 241-257). Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.

VenvilleG. (2004). Young children learning about living things: A case study of conceptual change from ontological and social perspectives. Journal of Research in Science Teaching41(5) 449-480.

VergouA. & WillisonJ. (2016). Relating social inclusion and environmental issues in botanic gardens. Environmental Education Research22(1) 21-42.

ViningJ.MerrickM. & PriceE. (2008). The distinction between humans and nature: Human perceptions of connectedness to nature and elements of the natural and unnatural. Human Ecology Review15(1) 1-11.

WallaceK. (2012). Environmental story-telling with dirty hands. Education Review2(2) 8-9.

WarkentinT. & FawcettL. (2010). Whale and human agency in world-making: Decolonizing whale-human encounters. In R. Acampora (Ed.) Metamorphoses of the zoo: Animal encounter after Noah (pp. 103-121). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

WertschJ. (2007). Mediation. In H. DanielsM. Cole and J. Wertsch (Eds.) The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178-192). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

WijeratneA. J.Van DijkP. A.Kirk-BrownA. & FrostL. (2014). Rules of engagement: the role of emotional display rules in delivering conservation interpretation in a zoo-based tourism context. Tourism Management42149-156.

Figures

  • View in gallery
    Left: Anna (interpreter) points to the dolphin’s right eye while talking to Victor ( forefront). Right: Victor slightly tilts his body to the right to observe the dolphin’s right eye.
  • View in gallery
    Left: Anna (interpreter) touches the dolphin’s fins to specify that her talk is directed to that part of the animal’s body. Right: Anna turns her palms up to create an analogy between her hands and the dolphin’s fins. (Note that a number of students keep their hands on the dolphin.)
  • View in gallery
    The dolphin (Zeus) opens his mouth so that the interpreter (Anna) can show his teeth to the children.
  • View in gallery
    Left: Anna is pointing to the fingerprints of the dolphin. Right: Rui is touching his thumb with the index finger (see arrow).

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 65 65 34
Full Text Views 70 70 32
PDF Downloads 8 8 6
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0