Cycle Two: Is there a “Natural Curriculum”?

            I believe that humans and the earth are intertwined, interrelated, and connected on both physical and spiritual levels.  The earth houses or brings forth the components and building blocks of life (water, food, air). Reconnecting with nature is a common component of well-being in many parts of the world (forest bathing in Japan, “Nature Step to Respiratory Health” in Finland (2018), or grounding) and is growing within the global medical community (for both physical and mental health). I wholeheartedly believe that there is such a thing as a “natural curriculum”.  Although, I also believe that the lived curriculum is a larger part of what we learn than our specific time within formal classroom learning.  I believe the natural curriculum is larger than what we learn in our science classes and I found the readings linking environmental issues and learning to social studies curriculum to be very interesting. 

 I personally have embraced interdisciplinary instruction and curriculum both in my teaching and in my life as a parent.  For my year of kindergarten classroom teaching, I looked at life as learning for my students and incorporated thematic teaching that was interdisciplinary across curricular goals but also focused on play, whole body engagement, and fine and gross motor skills.  As a parent, I’ve chosen to send my children to International Baccalaureate programs where instruction cannot be compartmentalized strictly by subject area. However, while science and social studies might be integrated with math and ELA, the natural curriculum seems to be largely ignored or bypassed within typical school and even perhaps in most students’ lives. Now, as I work in higher education, I largely ignore the natural realm within my own teaching.  

I view natural curriculum as how the natural world is integrated within our (or our students) lives.  What do we learn about nature?  How do we experience nature? How do we understand the interconnectedness between humans and earth?  I think Greta Thunberg’s TED talk was inspiring and a timely reminder of how action and learning intersect to bring awareness to environmental issues.  Greta’s talk provides a name and face to highlight how we as educators can leave out or ignore the complexities detailed in Kissling’s (2019) article, Teaching social studies amid ecological crisis within our classrooms.  Too often, nature is just a set of objectives or lessons to be taught in a discrete science unit or curriculum. The natural curriculum is not often integrated into school curriculum or into our lives with a cohesive, day to day type of focus necessary for the type of sustained learning or benefit from either nature directly or a deep understanding of the interwoven complexity of the human/earth relationship. Greta’s profound understanding highlights how we should be showcasing to our students the relationships and connections between curriculum and the natural world rather than compartmentalizing learning into specific or one-dimensional boxes.  

Personally, I try to keep a connection with nature to feel balanced.  I, like many of the former generations referenced in our readings, was raised pretty much immersed within the natural curriculum.  Free range parenting was not a trend in my neck of the woods but a basic standard of living.  I was raised on a large, diversified, dairy farm in the wildness (if you ask many locals, “God’s Country” and trolls from “Down Below” may or may not be welcomed) of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. To help illustrate the remoteness, there were more people in my freshman dorm at MSU than lived in the entire town where I was raised.  Weather, land stewardship, life cycles, animal husbandry, hunting, fishing, food production (from seed in the ground to harvest, and meat and bread on the table) were daily facts of life.  Having been raised in on-farm production agriculture (which encompasses less than 2% of American jobs) makes me a little different than the majority of my teaching peers.  It also sets me apart from many people in my general, probably a majority of people pursue or enjoy some version of a nature or outdoor hobby, however depending on nature for your livelihood in a rather harsh environment brings a completely different perspective and one that I’m struggled to share realistically with my students at various times.  I lament that my kids aren’t growing up with cows.  Cows (and all livestock) truly help keep you humble.  It’s hard to be snooty after you’ve spent hours throwing hay bales, milking, logging pulpwood, or mucking out any form of barn or stall.  It’s also hard to not appreciate the connectedness to the world that this perspective inherently brings.  I was astounded the first time I had students (or grown-up friends) tell me that milk came from QD.  

As a parent I truly want my children to internalize that everything in life is interconnected: from the people we chose to associate ourselves with, to the choices/decisions we make, to the lessons we learn, all the way to the ground we walk on.  However, forging a relationship with the earth isn’t as easy for me to teach my kids because they aren’t growing up the way that I did.  I am privileged to be raising my children as white and middle class in a very nice, safe neighborhood. I have 5 children and 4 of them are currently out enjoying the lovely weather we are having after a much colder week.  My oldest is working today but my other daughters (10 and 9) are busy riding bikes and walking our two corgis around the neighborhood with four of their friends, I can hear them coming from all the shouting and barking while I type.  My sons (16 and 14) are playing catch with about 5 of their baseball teammates that live within a couple blocks.  The pitcher has already broken a piece of siding on my shed and cracked a fence board in my backyard.  A harbinger of the spring and summer to come.  Try typing a blog post with 10-15 children of various ages swirling around the periphery at all times…it’s super fun. My kids are all outside, running and playing, and that’s more than most of their peers in our urban environment can say but are they really appreciating the natural curriculum or learning to feel connected to nature and the earth?  Probably not, and that bothers me sometimes. How can we expect an urban school to teach to a natural curriculum? Or any school?  I think it comes back to the lived curriculum and all aspects of education working together.  If parents don’t understand or appreciate the natural world, what gets passed down to the children?  

I think that pondering understanding and implementation of a natural curriculum into school and life highlights the integration necessary between student engagement, interest, and motivation to learn.  Learning (and life) needs to be considered holistically, not compartmentalized into neat and tidy boxes of curriculum and subject matter.  With stuff, I personally appreciate anything that can be tidied into neat, and well-organized containers.  However, I believe that learning and curriculum should be approached organically and holistically for the healthiest student and learning environment.  Excuse me, in trying to practice what I preach, I’m going to meet my neighbor to go walk around the forest, park, and ponds in our neighborhood.  I think I need to be immersed in the natural curriculum for a bit to consider how most effectively to integrate it into my teaching.