ALTERNATIVE EDUCATIONAL FUTURES:
PEDAGOGIES FOR EMERGENT WORLDS
MARCUS BUSSEY, SOHAIL INAYATULLAH and IVANA MILOJEVIĆ
Sense Publishers
Rotterdam
2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Pathways: Alternative educational futures .....................................................1
Marcus Bussey and Sohail Inayatullah
Part One: Mapping and Challenging Futures of Education
2. Mapping Educational Futures: Six foundational concepts and the six pillars
approach .....................................................................................................13
Sohail Inayatullah
3. Global Education: A musical exposition ......................................................41
Marcus Bussey
4. Futures Education: Catalyst for our times ....................................................57
Richard A. Slaughter
Part Two: Policy Issues in Education
5. A Futures Perspective: Lessons from the school room.................................75
David Hicks
6. Universities without ‘Quality’ and Quality without ‘Universities’ ..............90
James Dator
7. Images and Trends in Tension: The alternative futures of the university...111
Sohail Inayatullah
8. Pedagogical Practice after the Information Age .........................................129
Erica McWilliam and Shane Dawson
9. Access and Equity: Futures of an educational ideal ...................................144
Marcus Bussey
10. Cultivating Democratic Character: Reconceptualising ‘citizenship’ for a
partnership era..........................................................................................163
Kathleen Kesson
Part Three: Alternative Futures
11. Globo sapiens—‘Waste of Time’ or Work in Progress? ..........................181
Patricia Kelly
12. A Transformational Pedagogy for Futures Studies with a Case Study in
Biodiversity Futures .................................................................................194
Basil G. Savitsky
13. Did Buddha Laugh? A pedagogy for the future .......................................213
Julie Matthews and Robert Hattam
14. The Sattvic Choice: An Indian contribution to education for a sustainable
future ........................................................................................................224
Martin Haigh
15. Beyond Homogenisation of Global Education: Do alternative pedagogies
such as Steiner Education have anything to offer an emergent global/ising
world? ......................................................................................................242
Jennifer Gidley
16. Creative Pedagogy: Narrative approaches and a neohumanist philosophy of
education ..................................................................................................259
Billy Matheson
17. Integral Approaches to School Educational Futures.................................274
Jennifer Gidley and Gary Hampson
18. Conclusion: Developing futures literacy ..................................................293
Ivana Milojević
Index .........................................................................................................305
DAVID HICKS
5. A FUTURES PERSPECTIVE
Lessons from the school room
In this chapter I firstly set out some of the problems faced by practising teachers in
relation to the academic field of futures studies and then clarify the educational
rationale for developing a ‘futures perspective’ in the school curriculum. Whilst
schools have a crucial role to play in helping young people think about the future
what is actually possible and appropriate is dependent on children’s ages. I outline
some of what is currently known about children and young people’s perceptions of
the future and then give an example of how teachers and students who intend to be
teachers can be introduced to these concerns. Finally I indicate some of the areas of
futures education that require further research.
PROLOGUE
Teachers as professionals
All good futurists would probably like other professionals to be enthused about
their field. This is because it seems self-evident to us that the insights from futures
studies could be of benefit to most other academic fields. Wendell Bell (1997, p.
xxi) thus argues that specialists in other disciplines would benefit from futurising
their thinking and I would agree with this. Why, therefore, do I find social
commentators generally and teachers in particular so uninformed about futures
studies? I suspect Jim Dator (1998, p. 298) had the answer when he addressed
readers of the American Behavioural Scientist:
… the chances are very good that … you have never taken a course in futures
studies; never met a person who teaches it at the university level; teach or
study on a campus where futures studies is not offered; and probably
associate futures studies (if the term means anything to you at all) either with
astrology and charlatans or with Alvin Toffler, John Naisbitt, or Faith
Popcorn … Your most fundamental images of the future are almost certainly
shaped primarily by films and videos you have seen.
This would certainly be true for most school teachers but it would also be
reinforced by other forces relating to the professional context in which they work.
Most teachers consider themselves to be first and foremost educators, that is, they
feel they have an obligation to educate rather than proselytise. They thus feel it
would be wrong to add things to the curriculum simply because other professionals
feel they should and, anyway, the content of the curriculum may not be up for
negotiation if the education system is a highly centralised one. Secondly, many
DAVID HICKS
teachers in industrialised countries have been suffering from ‘curriculum fatigue’
in particular as a result of neoliberal policies which have lead to increasingly
utilitarian and market driven forms of education. Thirdly, teachers may unwittingly
resist innovative change because schools are but one of the many sites of cultural
reproduction which reflect prevailing hegemonic forces. They, as well as their
pupils, are often unable to think ‘outside the box’ whether socially or culturally, as
Apple (1993) and Giroux (1992) have argued at length, or ecologically, as writers
such as Orr (1994) and Bowers (1997) have argued. Western forms of education,
whether as practised at home or exported, thus tend to reflect white, male,
neoliberal views of the world (Apple, 2001)—and of the future (Milojević, 2002).
Children and Youth
If we believe that adults can benefit from the insights of futures studies in their
personal lives, their work and their communities, then what they might or might
not have learnt about futures in their youth and childhood needs to be of vital
interest too. I use the term futures education, as against futures studies, to
distinguish what may or may not go on in schools and formal education up to the
age of 18. Whilst culture, ethnicity, gender and class will affect young people’s
views of the future (as it also does for adults), what in particular affects them is the
process of childhood socialisation and development.
How children conceptualise the future varies with age. In early childhood we are
dealing with quite different notions of the future to those held by older children
(Page, 2000). As they enter the middle years of schooling (7–14), children’s views
begin to take on some aspects of adult understanding (Hicks & Holden, 1995) and
these mature with age. Youth futures (15–25) have also been noted as a specific
category differing in crucial ways from adult views (Gidley & Inayatullah, 2002).
A range of important changes are thus taking place in youth and childhood which
makes futures education a distinctly different enterprise to that of futures studies.
How adults conceptualise the future is largely a result of what did, or did not,
happen to them during this crucial formative period.
The Problem with Futures Studies
The problem with futures studies for teachers is that most of them will never have
heard of it for the reasons given by Dator above. If they do come across the field, it
appears to be an academic and research-based activity carried on in universities.
This puts most teachers off because universities seem remote from their daily life
in classrooms. The nature of futures studies is thus likely to be misunderstood and,
even if understood, not seen as immediately useful to teachers in schools. There is
nowhere I can point to at the moment in the UK as an example of good practice in
futures education. Whilst the English Qualifications and Curriculum Authority has
a Futures Programme (www.qca.org.uk/11232.html), on closer inspection this turns
out to be primarily about the future of the curriculum and contains little that
specifically helps teachers think more critically and creatively about a range of
alternative futures, whether for society or education.
76
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
Many other issue-orientated academic fields have given rise to lively and
innovative educational fields. Examples include global education, development
education, environmental education, peace education, intercultural education.
Whilst each maintains its own distinct identity, many see these fields as potential
allies with overlapping interests. When educators refer by name to these issuebased educations what is generally missing, however, is any reference to futures
studies or futures education. In other words, we have as yet to gain widespread
credibility with natural educational allies. One of the few exceptions is Pike and
Selby’s (1999) model of global education which argues that the spatial and
temporal dimensions of the curriculum are of equal importance.
FUTURES EDUCATION
Educational Rationale
Whilst ‘futures education’ or ‘futures in education’ are useful shorthand terms to
designate the application of futures ideas to formal schooling and teacher training,
it is important to recall that this is not generally part of the everyday vocabulary of
teachers. They are more likely to talk about ‘preparing children for the future’ and,
if urged to be more specific about the future in their teaching, would probably
demand a clear educational rationale for this. This is an appropriate request for an
educator to make and one that can easily be answered in the professional language
of teachers as shown below in Table 1.
Table 1. Rationale for a futures dimension in the curriculum
Pupil motivation
Pupil expectation about the future can affect behaviour in the present, e.g., that
something is, or is not, worth working for. Clear images of desired personal goals
can help stimulate motivation and achievement.
Anticipating change
Anticipatory skills and flexibility of mind are important in times of rapid change.
Such skills enable pupils to deal more effectively with uncertainty and to initiate,
rather than merely respond to, change.
Critical thinking
In weighing up information, considering trends and imagining alternatives, pupils
will need to exercise reflective and critical thinking. This is often triggered by
realising the contradictions between how the world is now and how one would like
it to be.
Clarifying values
All images of the future are underpinned by differing value assumptions about
human nature and society. In a democratic society pupils need to be able to begin
to identify such value judgements before they can themselves make appropriate
choices between alternatives.
Decision making
Becoming more aware of trends and events which are likely to influence one’s
future and investigating the possible consequences of one’s actions on others in the
77
DAVID HICKS
future, leads to more thoughtful decision making in the present.
Creative imagination
One faculty that can contribute to, and which is particularly enhanced by,
designing alternative futures is that of the creative imagination. Both this and
critical thinking are needed to envision a range of preferable futures from the
personal to the global.
A better world
It is important in a democratic society that pupils develop their sense of vision,
particularly in relation to more just and sustainable futures. Such forward looking
thinking is an essential ingredient in both the preserving and improving of society.
Responsible citizenship
Critical participation in democratic life leads to the development of political skills
and thus more active and responsible citizenship. Future generations are then more
likely to benefit, rather than lose, from decisions made today.
Aims of Futures Education
In exploring the elements of such a rationale with teachers it then becomes possible
to talk about the need for a ‘futures dimension’ within the curriculum and the need
for pupils to develop a ‘futures perspective’, i.e., the ability to think more critically
and creatively about the future. The specific aims of futures education can be
formulated as helping teachers and pupils to:
– develop a more future-orientated perspective both on their own lives
and events in the wider world;
– identify and envision alternative futures which are just and sustainable;
– exercise critical thinking skills and the creative imagination more
effectively;
– participate in more thoughtful and informed decision making in the
present; and
– engage in active and responsible citizenship, both in the local, national
and global community, and on behalf of present and future generations
Aims such as these are of interest to a wide range of educators concerned with
subjects such as English, maths, science, technology, geography, history, modern
languages, business studies and religious education. They are also of particular
relevance to equal opportunities, multicultural education, and cross-curricular
themes such as education for sustainability, citizenship, and personal and social
education.
At the same time, discussion with teachers and teacher educators in various
countries reveals that the future is largely a missing dimension within education.
Gough’s (1990) investigation into the portrayal of futures in educational discourse
is invaluable here. After examining a range of educational documents he identified
three common types of reference to the future—tacit, token and taken–for–granted.
Tacit futures are all those which are assumed and never brought out into the open.
They remain hidden and unexplicated but nevertheless present. Thus the future
may not even be mentioned in an educational document but assumptions about it
are still tacitly present. Token futures often involve clichés and stereotypes
presented in a rhetorical fashion. Gough (1990, p. 303) notes, “When one finds ‘the
78
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
future’ (or a futures-oriented inference) in the title of an educational document it
usually means much less than might be expected”. Taken–for–granted futures
occur whenever a particular future, or range of futures, is described as if there were
no alternatives. Discussion of the future framed solely in terms of science and
technology or work and leisure would be in this category.
Insights from Futures Studies
It is interesting to reflect on which insights and concepts from futures studies have
been taken up by teachers and used in their work and also how they have been
developed for use with children. Whilst the teaching materials available to schools
are still relatively limited, it is nevertheless still possible to give some idea of the
concepts that have been taken up. The following examples are fairly representative
of responses over the last 25 years in Western education.
Amongst the concepts used in a seminal booklet from the US National Council
for Social Studies (Fitch & Svengalis, 1979) are: possible, probable and preferable
futures; utopian and dystopian writing; assumptions about time; scenarios; trend
analysis; forecasting; cross-impact matrices; and futures wheels. Riley’s (1989)
resource book for teachers includes: possible, probable and preferable futures;
trend extrapolation; futures wheels; Delphi technique; cross-impact matrices;
scenarios; values and the future; imaging; and timelines. Pike and Selby’s (1999)
resource book on global education refers to: possible, probable and preferable
futures; futures wheels; intergenerational justice; and sustainability. A resource
book on citizenship education (Hicks, 2001) contains: images of the future; futures
wheels; probable and preferable futures; rights of future generations; scenarios; and
sustainable futures. Contributors to Gidley and Inayatullah’s (2002) book on youth
futures further confirm that a wide range of futures tools are being used with young
people as does Slaughter and Bussey’s Futures Thinking for Social Foresight
(2006).
YOUNG PEOPLE AND THE FUTURE
Understanding how children and young people develop their ideas about the future
is crucial since it is from this formative period that adult perceptions emerge. The
importance of futures education in schools lies in its capacity to challenge often
unconscious processes. The literature on children and young people’s views of the
future has been growing slowly since the mid-90s and a flavour of this will be
given under the headings primary, secondary and youth. (NB. Since ‘secondary’
encompasses 11–18 and ‘youth’ 15–25, there is an overlap between these two
categories.) As you will notice the research still has a very Western bias so one
should be cautious about generalising from this.
Primary Level
It is a common assumption amongst many teachers that younger pupils have little
conception of issues in the wider world. However, Fountain (1990) points out that
79
DAVID HICKS
nursery and infant children (age 4–7) regularly: call each other names (prejudice);
arbitrarily exclude others from their play (discrimination); argue over materials
(resource distribution); protest that rules are not fair (human rights); quarrel and
fight (peace and conflict); waste consumable materials (environmental awareness);
find out that more can be accomplished by working together (interdependence).
Issues that might initially be considered national or global are thus present in many
classrooms and need to be recognised and worked with.
One of the few educators to explore how young children conceptualise the
future is Australian early years specialist Jane Page (2000), who notes that futures
educators generally ignore this age group. Her work with 4 and 5 year olds,
however, shows that futures concepts are beginning to be developed at this age.
The children she studied have a fundamentally different attitude towards the future,
time and change than older children. Time is viewed purely in terms of the child’s
own activities, i.e., in four sleeps rather than four days time. They cannot
understand that time exists independent of themselves, but there is a growing sense
of progression beginning with notions of ‘before’ and ‘after’ and moving on to
‘yesterday’ and ‘tomorrow’.
The ‘future’ means being older or things changing. There is a growing
awareness of societal issues, for example the environment, war, music, places and
events in the news. Thinking about the future at this age involves imaginative
fantasy, past and future often get mixed up (they are both the ‘not now’), and there
is a great sense of control and freedom over the future in such play. Whilst this
may seem idiosyncratic and unrealistic from an adult point of view, this is a vital
developmental stage. Young children are developing positive feelings about their
place in the future and their role in its creation and are more positive than older
children about the future.
Whilst different levels of ability are found in conceptualising the future at 7–8,
this is when initial manifestations of an ‘adult’ understanding of time begin to
appear. Research by Hicks and Holden (1995) in England shows the emergence of
an ability to think ahead and the realisation that the future may be something to
work towards as well as something to be concerned about. Reality and fantasy may
still sit side by side and children sometimes fear that their own area may be subject
to violence and wars seen in other places on TV. There is a growing awareness of
social and environmental issues and children are generally optimistic that the future
will be better both for themselves and others. However, some think problems such
as pollution and poverty may get worse. Boys often fear global disasters, for
example the world exploding or aliens landing.
Secondary Level
Understandably, young people’s concerns for the future tend to reflect current
national and global events although these may change over time. In the 90s Hicks
and Holden (1995) found that in relation to their personal futures English
adolescents were concerned about getting a good job, having a good life, issues of
health, good relationships and doing well at school. In relation to the futures of
their local community they identified crime and violence, jobs and employment,
80
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
the range of amenities, and environmental threats as their main concerns. In terms
of the global future, they were worried about issues of war and peace,
environmental damage, poverty and hunger, and relationships between countries.
Pessimism increased with age and most felt that they had not learnt enough about
these issues at school.
Oscarsson’s (1996) work with Swedish teenagers showed similar findings. A
majority of pupils had a positive view of their own future, although many reported
what he called ‘uncertain optimism’ in relation to work. Unemployment was seen
as the main threat to their personal futures and, to a lesser extent, environmental
problems. They had a less optimistic vision of Sweden’s future, however, often
expressing concern about economic conditions. Nearly two-thirds had a pessimistic
view of the global future, particularly in relation to environmental issues and to a
lesser extent warfare. Their views of the global future were more pessimistic than
those of personal or Swedish futures. Brunstad’s (2002) research in Norway and
Rubin’s (2000) in Finland echo some of these ‘European’ themes. Rubin also
examines in some depth the relationship between young people’s concerns and the
wider socio-cultural context.
Hutchinson’s (1996) work with Australian teenagers focused in particular on the
nature of their probable and preferable futures. Their probable futures fell into six
broad categories: i) an uncompassionate world (depersonalised and uncaring); ii) a
physically violent world (with a high likelihood of war); iii) a divided world
(between ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’); iv) a mechanised world (of often violent
technological change); v) an environmentally unsustainable world (with continued
degradation of the biosphere); and vi) a politically corrupt and deceitful world
(where voting is a waste of time). Their preferable futures fell into four broad
categories: i) technocratic dreaming (uncritical acceptance, especially amongst
boys, of techno-fix solutions for all problems); ii) demilitarisation and greening (of
science and technology to meet genuine human needs); iii) intergenerational equity
(accepting responsibility for future generations); and iv) making peace (with
people and planet via a reconceptualisation of both ethics and lifestyles). These are
very powerful images for young people who said they had learnt little about futures
in school.
Youth Futures
A most welcome addition to this comparative research is Gidley and Inayatullah’s
(2002) Youth Futures in which Eckersley (2002) has a chapter on Australian youth.
He reports that the future most young Australians want is neither the future they
expect, nor the future they are promised. Most do not expect Australian society to
be better than today in 2010. They see a society driven by greed whilst what they
would like is one motivated by generosity. Their dreams are for a society that
places less emphasis on the individual, material wealth and competition, and more
on community and family, the environment and co-operation. The belief that life
would improve is a minority position and pessimism increases with age; those in
their 20s are more negative than those in their teens. In an earlier account of this
research, Eckersley (1999) concludes “Young people’s preferred futures are
81
DAVID HICKS
undoubtedly idealised and utopian. Their significance lies in what they reveal
about fundamental human needs … and what they expect and what is being offered
to them by world and national leaders”.
It is clear from the above that much of the existing research on young people
and the future relates to Western societies so that, as yet, limited cross-cultural
comparisons can be made. Research on youth futures is also, by definition, less
likely to look at age differences than work done in schools. Two contrasting studies
deal with Japan and Singapore. Wright (2002) examines the role of contemporary
Japanese youth in challenging traditional values and argues that their ‘cool
resistance’ may enable them to rewrite a future that has already been colonised by
their parents’ culture. In a different vein, Oehlers (2002) explores how political and
cultural pressures in Singapore have largely stifled any youth disaffection so that
any debate about alternative futures is almost impossible.
TEACHER EDUCATION
A Global Dimension
For futures education to have a greater impact on schools it is clear that initial and
on-going teacher education are crucial arenas to influence. The obstacles in teacher
education, however, are likely to be similar to those in schools. I thus think it is
tactically easier, in schools and teacher education, to get people thinking first about
the need for a ‘global dimension’ in the curriculum (where are we now?) and then
to go on to consider the need for a ‘futures perspective’ (what may happen as a
consequence?). Thus, rather than starting with the future and explaining its
importance in relation to the global issues in the present, one begins by looking at
the state of the world in the present which automatically leads on to questions
about the future (Hicks & Holden, 2007). What’s happening now will always be
more tangible than what has yet to come. An example of this in terms of
educational policy and practice comes from my own institution, Bath Spa
University in the UK.
Traditionally, undergraduates training to be teachers in England used to take a
degree which focused rather narrowly on the National Curriculum and the
professional training of teachers. Increasingly, a number of universities have
replaced this with a 3+1 route, i.e., a three-year degree (Education Studies as single
honours or Education with a subject specialism as joint honours) followed by a
one-year post-graduate Certificate in Education—which is where their professional
training now occurs. Those who do this at Bath Spa are guaranteed a global
perspective in their modular programme because it forms a key strand in the
Education Studies degree. The School of Education specifically chose this strategy
in order to bring breadth and depth back to the study of education.
Modules are arranged in three strands ~ A: Learning and curriculum; B:
Teaching, settings and structures; C: Global and international. Education students
have to choose modules from each of these groups, so all of them will have some
understanding of the need for and nature of a global perspective. In their first year
all students take a compulsory module entitled Education for Change which
82
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
explores three main themes: i) the nature and purposes of education; ii) the current
state of the world; and iii) the need for a global and futures dimension in the
curriculum. The ‘international’ modules explore the nature of education in different
cultural settings. The ‘global’ modules focus on contemporary global issues and
concerns. These include futures, citizenship, human rights, and sustainability.
A Futures Perspective
Table 2. ED2013 Education for the Future
Description
‘Futures in education’ is the shorthand term used internationally by educators who
believe that one of the main tasks of education is to prepare young people for a
future that will necessarily be very different from today. In the UK teachers are
more likely to talk about ‘education for the future’ when they express this concern.
This module will introduce you to the crucial need for a futures perspective in
schools and the ways in which this can be used to enhance pupils’ learning. It will
look at how young people feel about the future, locally and globally, and ways in
which images of the future affect what we feel is worth doing in the present. It will
explore the nature of both probable and preferable futures in the early 21st century
and encourage you to think more critically and creatively about your personal and
professional futures.
Learning outcomes
By the end of this module you should be able to:
Understand the need for a futures perspective in the curriculum
Think critically and creatively about futures related issues
Reflect critically on both the meaning and practice of futures education
Develop classroom activities that encourage futures-orientated thinking
Outline programme
Facing the future
Popular images of the future
Understanding futures studies
Whose futures?
The nature of futures education
A futures perspective (primary)
Young people’s views (secondary)
Envisioning preferable futures
The need for sustainable futures
Course review and evaluation
Each year around 25 second year students take module ED2013 Education for the
Future. The time allowed for this module is a one-hour lecture and a two-hour
seminar each week for 12 weeks. A flavour of the module is conveyed by the
following details (Table 2).
83
DAVID HICKS
EPILOGUE
Issues Arising
There are two quite different issues that I would like to raise here. The first is to do
with the significance of what we are learning from the research and the second is
procedural in the sense of how best to influence teachers and educational policy
makers.
Whilst we now know more about what young people think about the future, we
are only just beginning to engage with what that might mean. Eckersley (2002, p.
32) highlights the difficulties when he writes:
There is little doubt that many qualities that future fears might intuitively be
expected to influence—hope, purpose and meaning in life, coherence,
efficacy, or agency—are important to well-being. However, we may never be
able to do more than suggest this because of the difficulty of disentangling
concerns about the fate of the earth from the many other factors that influence
these qualities, and hence well-being.
He further notes important qualifications to the belief that global pessimism
might be eroding young people’s well being. Firstly, the direction of any causal
relationship between future pessimism and diminished well being can run two
ways. Young people may feel pessimistic about the future because of their
experience of the world now; at the same time, if depression levels are increasing
in society then future visions are likely to become more pessimistic. Secondly, the
wider research on well being shows that most people report satisfaction with their
lives and that this is most influenced by family, work, friends and leisure. Thirdly,
pessimism is only one of several cultural traits in modern Western society that are
inimical to well being, including consumerism, deconstructive postmodernism and
individualism.
Futures education has as yet to make a significant impact in schools despite a
range of important initiatives instigated by committed educators in different
countries (e.g., Gidley et al., 2004; Morgan, 2006). In this respect, unfortunately, I
have to take issue with Slaughter (2002) who argues that there has been a shift
from ‘rhetoric to reality’ in schools and that futures is emerging into the
educational mainstream. The list, however, is still the ‘usual suspects’—a handful
of innovative educators in the US, Australia and the UK—but not yet a sea change
in the wider educational system. One of my measures of this, as I mentioned
earlier, is that futures education still seldom makes it into the list of ‘issue-based
educations’ that socially committed educators around the world are conversant
with.
Global education is an interesting case in point. It is an international educational
field that has at least a 30 year history, its own professional organisations and
publications, conferences, alliances, documents, agendas, official policies and
curriculum frameworks (Oxfam, 2006; Pike, 2000; DfES, 2005). Most of this effort
is aimed at primary and secondary schools and teacher education. If there are
lessons here for futures education, it could be that it may take years of dedicated
work before the need for a ‘futures perspective’ is as widely accepted as the need
84
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
for a ‘global dimension’ in the curriculum. This requires a younger generation of
futures educators to be also involved in that struggle. An alternative, of course, is
that futures educators should infiltrate other issue-based educations and ensure that
they each contain a futures element (Hicks, 2004).
A good example of this can be found in environmental education, where a recent
review of empirical studies of learners and learning (Rickinson, 2001) included a
section on young people’s views of the future. Conversely, I was intrigued to read
a recent biography of Elise Boulding (Morrison, 2001) which was written in terms
of her contribution to peace education and feminist research but made no reference
to her vital work on futures. One of the most useful entry points for those educators
interested in a ‘futures perspective’ could still be global education. Pike and Selby,
influential theorists in this field, have long argued for a model of global education
that contains four main elements: an issues dimension; a spatial dimension; a
temporal dimension; and a process dimension. This model is described in Pike and
Selby (1999) together with a range of practical classroom activities.
Research Needed
The field of futures education is still under-researched and there are many crucial
issues and themes awaiting investigation. Even an initial list of basic research that
needs to be done (Hicks, 2006) is quite a long one (see Table 3).
Table 3. Research needed in futures education
Images of the future
How do children conceptualise time and the future and how does this vary with
age?
•
How do children’s views of the future vary by gender?
•
How do children’s views of the future vary by social class?
•
How do children’s views of the future vary by ethnic group?
•
What is the nature of children’s probable and preferred futures?
•
What emerges from cross-cultural comparisons of the above?
NB. Views of the future could be broken down into personal, local, national and
global.
Media influences on images
What images of the future are conveyed by children’s books, comics and computer
games?
What images of the future are conveyed by TV advertising?
What images of the future have been conveyed by popular movies over the last 25
years?
How do such images relate to issues of gender, age, class and Western culture?
Image and action
How do images of the future affect attitudes and behaviour in the present?
What determines reactive or proactive stances in relation to the future?
What changes in attitude and behaviour arise from extended futures-orientated
work in a school or classroom?
85
DAVID HICKS
What do teaching materials that encourage skills of participation and responsible
action look like for different age groups?
Resources and policy
What do appropriate teaching materials look like for different subject areas and
how can subject specialists be encouraged to develop them?
Which futures methodologies are most useful in the classroom and how can they
be related to a range of other learning outcomes?
How can head teachers, school governors and parents be persuaded of the need for
a futures dimension in the curriculum?
What educational bodies and which key players would need to be influenced in
order to gain official backing for such a dimension in the curriculum?
This is in no way intended to be a complete list but it highlights a range of initial
research possibilities.
And Finally
There is no clear body of opinion within mainstream education that understands or
supports the need for a futures perspective in schools. It is still the domain of a
loose international network of socially committed educators. Future steps that need
to be taken could include the following:
– Creation internationally of a seed group of educators specifically
committed to futures education, possibly as an offshoot of the World
Futures Studies Federation.
– Creation nationally of networks of teachers and teacher educators
committed to futures education.
– Setting up alliances, nationally and internationally, with colleagues
working in global education, social education, education for
sustainability.
– The development of teaching materials for different age groups and
subject areas that embody the principles of futures education.
– Working with professional groups (e.g., teachers, head teachers, subject
specialists) to incorporate a futures perspective in policy documents.
– Offering professional development programmes to schools, local
authorities, curriculum development bodies and other national bodies.
– Identifying key players in education who need to be inducted into the
principles and practice of futures education.
– Circulating nationally and internationally, via conferences and
newsletters, examples of successful practice at all levels of education.
If official recognition of a global perspective in the UK is anything to go, by
achieving the same for a futures perspective could yet take some time. Is there
enough commitment internationally to attempt this? Who are the key players and
where are they now? Who would be natural allies? What and where are the
pressure points which need to be worked on? And how can the wider field of
futures studies support those working in schools and teacher education to begin
such a programme?
86
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
In discussing William Morris’s great utopian novel, News from Nowhere,
Coleman and O’Sullivan (1990, p.10) write:
Let us imagine that life is not as it is, but as it one day might be. Let us
inspect the unknown terrain of the future, as if we are about to inhabit it …
the imagined future is a subversive force: the more who imagine a different
kind of future, and imagine constructively, materially and determinedly, the
more dangerous utopian dreams become. They grow from dreams to aims.
Morris, I suspect, would be delighted to know that in the early twenty-first century
these concerns are still alive and at the heart of the academic field of futures
studies—and futures education in schools.
REFERENCES
Apple, M. (1993). Official Knowledge: Democratic Education in a Conservative Age. London:
Routledge.
Apple, M. (2001). Educating the ‘Right’ Way: Markets, Standards, God, and Inequality. London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Bell, W. (1997). Foundations of Futures Studies (Vol. 1). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Bowers, C. (1997). The Culture of Denial: Why the Environmental Movement Needs a Strategy for
Reforming Universities and Public Schools. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Brunstad, P. (2002). Longing for belonging: Youth culture in Norway. In J. Gidley & S. Inayatullah
(Eds.), Youth Futures: Comparative Research and Transformative Visions (Chapter 12). Westport,
CT: Praeger.
Coleman, S., & O’Sullivan, P. (1990). William Morris and News from Nowhere: A Vision for Our Time.
Bideford: Green Books.
Dator, J. (1998). The future lies behind! Thirty years of teaching futures studies. American Behavioural
Scientist, 42, 298-319.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2005). Developing the Global Dimension in the School
Curriculum. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Eckersley, R. (1999). Dreams and expectations: Young people’s expected and preferred futures and
their significance for education. Futures, 31, 73-90.
Eckersley, R. (2002). Future visions, social realities, and private lives: Young people and their personal
well-being. In J. Gidley & S. Inayatullah (Eds.) Youth Futures: Comparative Research and
Transformative Visions (Chapter 3). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Fitch, R., & Svengalis, C. (1979). Futures Unlimited: Teaching About Worlds to Come. Bulletin 59.
Washington DC: National Council for Social Studies.
Fountain, S. (1990). Learning Together: Global Education 4–7. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.
Gidley, J., & Inayatullah, S. (Eds.) (2002). Youth Futures: Comparative Research and Transformative
Visions. Westport CT: Praeger.
Gidley, J., Bateman, D., & Smith, C. (2004). Futures in Education: Principles, Practice and Potential.
Australian Foresight Institute, Melbourne: Swinburne University of Technology.
Giroux, H. (1992). Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education. London:
Routledge.
Gough, N. (1990). Futures in Australian education: Tacit, token and taken for granted. Futures, 22, 298310.
Hicks, D. (2001). Citizenship for the Future: A Practical Classroom Guide. Godalming: World Wide
Fund for Nature UK.
Hicks, D. (2006). Lessons for the Future: The Missing Dimension in Education. Victoria, BC: Trafford
Publishing.
87
DAVID HICKS
Hicks, D. (2004). Teaching for tomorrow: what can futures studies contribute to peace education?
Journal of Peace Education, 1(2), 165-178.
Hicks, D., & Holden, C. (1995). Visions of the Future: Why We Need to Teach for Tomorrow. Stoke-onTrent: Trentham Books.
Hicks, D., & Holden, C. (Eds.) (2007). Teaching the Global Dimension: Key Principles and Effective
Practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Hicks, D., & Slaughter, R. (Eds.) (1998). Futures Education: The World Yearbook of Education 1998.
London: Kogan Page.
Hutchinson, F. (1996). Educating Beyond Violent Futures. London: Routledge
Milojević, I. (2002). Futures of Education: Feminist and Post-Western Critiques and Visions. PhD
thesis, Brisbane: University of Queensland.
Morgan, A. (2006). Teaching geography for a sustainable future. In D. Balderstone (Ed.), Secondary
Geography Handbook (Chapter 23). Sheffield: Geographical Association.
Morrison, M. (2001). The life of Elise Boulding: Educating towards a culture of peace. Vitae
Scholasticae, Spring, 7-21.
Oehlers, A. (2002). Imagining the future: Youth in Singapore. In J. Gidley & S. Inayatullah (Eds.)
Youth Futures: Comparative Research and Transformative Visions (Chapter 9). Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Orr, D. (1994). Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment and the Human Prospect. Washington DC:
Island Press.
Oscarsson, V. (1996). Pupils’ views of the future. In A. Osler, et al. (Eds.) Teaching for Citizenship in
Europe (Chapter 18). Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.
Oxfam (2006). A Curriculum for Global Citizenship. Oxford: Oxfam.
Page, J. (2000). Reframing the Early Childhood Curriculum: Educational Imperatives for the Future.
London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Pike, G. (2000). Global education and national identity: In pursuit of meaning. Theory into Practice,
39(2), 64-74.
Pike, G., & Selby, D. (1999). In the Global Classroom (Vol. 1). Toronto: Pippin.
Publishing Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2006). Futures Progamme. Available online at:
www.gca.org.uk/11232.html.
Rickinson, M. (2001). Learners and learning in environmental education: A critical review of the
evidence. Environmental Education Research (special issue), 7(3), 207-317.
Riley, K. (1989). Towards Tomorrow. New York: Scholastic.
Rubin, A. (2000). Growing Up in Social Transition: In Search of a Late-Modern Identity. Turku:
University of Turku.
Slaughter, R. (2002). From rhetoric to reality: the emergence of futures into the educational mainstream.
In J. Gidley & S. Inayatullah (Eds.) Youth Futures: Comparative Research and Transformative
Visions (Chapter 14). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Slaughter, R., & Bussey, M. (2006). Futures Thinking for Social Foresight. Tamsui, Taiwan: Tamkang
University Press.
Wright, D. (2002). Japanese youth: rewriting futures in the ‘no taboos’ postbubble millennium. In J.
Gidley & S. Inayatullah (Eds.) Youth Futures: Comparative Research and Transformative Visions
(Chapter 7). Westport, CT: Praeger.
AFFILIATIONS
David Hicks is Professor in the School of Education at Bath Spa University. He is
internationally recognised for his work on the need for a global and futures
dimension in the curriculum and is particularly interested in ways of helping
students and teachers think more critically and creatively about the future. He has
published widely in the fields of futures education and global education. His most
88
LESSONS FROM THE SCHOOL ROOM
recent books are Teaching the Global Dimension: Key Principles and Effective
Practice, with Cathie Holden (RoutledgeFalmer, 2007), Lessons for the Future:
The Missing Dimension in Education (Trafford Publishing, 2005), and Citizenship
for the Future: A Practical Classroom Guide (World Wide Fund for Nature UK,
2001).
89