Popular instructional approaches in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (ECEfS) are co-construction learning, transformative learning and ecological learning. These rely on constructivism that could challenge human–nature relationships of ECEfS. In this study, we aim to discover and reshape human–nature relationships embedded in the approaches. To do so, we deconstruct the approaches through a metaphysical analysis with ontology, epistemology and axiology. As a result, we confirm that they are likely to view humans and nature as two separate entities. For sustainability, we distinguish an ontological view (‘N’ature) and an epistemological view (‘n’ature) and justify the distinction based on posthumanists’ concepts of non-humans and more-than-humans. We present a metaphysically reshaped human–nature relationship and argue that this new model enables teachers to critically review ‘human-made/observed natures’ and participate in the reconciliation between ‘N’ature and humanity. We also apply the model into a waste-recycle activity to clarify its potential practicality.
BakariM. E.-K. (2016). Mapping the ‘anthropocentric-ecocentric dualism’ in the history of American presidency: The good, the bad, and the ambivalent. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences, 14(2), 191–233. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8736WKW
2.
BolterJ. D. (2016). Posthumanism. In JensenK.B.CraigR.T.PooleyJ.D.RothenbuhlerE.W. (Eds.), The International encyclopedia of communication theory and philosophy (pp. 1–8). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect220
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press.
7.
BronfenbrennerU. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In VastaR. (Ed.), Annals of child development (pp. 187–248). JAI Press.
8.
CarterN. (2007). The politics of the environment: Ideas, activism, policy (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
9.
ChesworthL. (2016). A funds of knowledge approach to examining play interests: listening to children’s and parents’ perspectives. International Journal of Early Years Education, 24(3), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2016.1188370
10.
Cutter-Mackenzie-KnowlesA.MaloneK.HackingE. B. (2020). Research handbook on childhoodnature: Assemblages of childhood and nature research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67286-1
DirkxJ.MezirowJ.CrantonP. (2006). Musings and reflections on the meaning, context, and process of transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(2), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344606287503
14.
DreamsonN. (2016). Reinventing intercultural education: A metaphysical manifest for cultural diversity. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315439365
15.
ElliottS. (2014). Sustainability and the early years learning framework. Pademelon Press.
16.
ElliottS.DavisJ. (2018). Challenging taken-for-granted ideas in early childhood education: A critique of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory in the age of post-humanism. In Research handbook on childhoodnature: assemblages of childhood nature research (pp. 1–36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51949-4_60-1
17.
ElliottS.McCreaN.NewsomeL.GaulJ. (2016). Sustainability as a different way of thinking everyday. In Examining environmental education in NSW early childhood education services: A literature review with findings from the field. The NSW OEH Environmental Trust. https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/grants/160418-Early-Childhood-Report.pdf.
18.
ElliottS.YoungT. (2016). Nature by default in early childhood education for sustainability. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 57–64. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2015.44
19.
FerrandoF. (2014). Posthumanism, transhumanism, antihumanism, metahumanism, and new materialism: Differences and relations. Existenz, 8(2), 26–32. https://existenz.us/volumes/Vol.8-2Ferrando.pdf
20.
GonzálezN.MollL. C.AmantiC. (Eds.). (2006). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Routledge.
21.
HägglundS.SamuelssonI. P. (2009). Early childhood education and learning for sustainable development and citizenship. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168878
22.
Hazer SancarF.Can ServercanY (2010). In search of agency: Participation in a youth organisation in Turkey. In Percy-SmithB.ThomasN. (Eds.), A handbook of children and young people’s participation (pp. 277–286). Routledge.
23.
HedgesH.CullenJ. (2005). Subject knowledge in early childhood curriculum and pedagogy: Beliefs and practices. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 6(1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2005.6.1.10
24.
HerbrechterC. (2012). Introduction: Posthumanist subjectivities, or, coming after the subject. Subjectivity, 5(3), 241–264. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2012.17
IvesC. D.AbsonD. J.von WehrdenH.DorningerC.KlanieckiK.FischerJ. (2018). Reconnecting with nature for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 13(5), 1389–1397. https://doi.org/10.1057/SUB.2012.17
27.
JiO.StuhmckeS. (2014). The project approach in early childhood education for sustainability. In Research in early childhood education for sustainability: International perspectives and provocations (pp. 158–179). Routledge.
28.
KhabanyaneK. E.MaimaneJ. R.RamabenyaneM. J. (2014). A critical reflection on transformative learning as experienced by student-teachers during school-based learning. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(27), 452–459. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n27p452
29.
KitchenhamA. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344608322678
30.
Knorr-CetinaK. (1999). Epistemic cultures. How the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press.
31.
KopninaH. (2012). Education for sustainable development (ESD): The turn away from ‘environment’ in environmental education?Environmental Education Research, 18(5), 699–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.658028
32.
KuhnT. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
33.
MackeyG. (2014). Valuing agency in young children: Teachers rising to the challenge of sustainability in the Aotearoa New Zealand early childhood context. In Research in early childhood education for sustainability (pp. 196–209). Routledge.
34.
MacNaughtonG.HughesP.SmithK. (Eds.). (2009). Young children as active citizens: Principles, policies and pedagogies. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
35.
MaloneK. (2016). Reconsidering children’s encounters with nature and place using posthumanism. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2015.48
36.
MastersonV. A.EnqvistJ. P.StedmanR. C.TengöM. (2019). Sense of place in social–ecological systems: from theory to empirics. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 555–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00695-8
37.
McLarenP. (2003). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundation of Education. Pearson Education, Inc.
38.
McWhinneyWMarkosL. (2003). Transformative education: Across the threshold. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(1), 16–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344603252098
MezirowJ. (2009). An overview on transformative learning. In IllerisK. (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning (pp. 90–105). Routledge.
41.
MillerM. G. (2014). Intercultural dialogues in early childhood education for sustainability: Embedding Indigenous perspectives. In Research in early childhood education for sustainability (pp. 79–94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315767499
42.
MurrisK. (2020). Posthuman child and the diffractive teacher: Decolonizing the nature/culture binary. In Cutter-MackenzieA.MaloneK.Barratt HackingE. (Eds.), Research handbook on childhoodnature (pp. 31–55). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51949-4_7-2
43.
RaymondC. M.SinghG. G.BenessaiahKBernhardtJ. R.LevineJ.NelsonH.ChanK. M. A. (2013). Ecosystem services and beyond: Using multiple metaphors to understand human-environment relationships. Bioscience, 63(7), 536–546. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.7.7
44.
RobinsonL.VaealikiS. (2010). Ethics and pedagogy at the heart of early childhood education for sustainability. In Young children and the environment: Early education for sustainability (pp. 154–182). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511845390.007
45.
SalihuM. J. (2016). Qualitative and quantitative debates in contemporary educational research. International Journal of Research in Education Methodology, 7(5), 1323–1327. https://doi.org/10.24297/ijrem.v7i5.4343
SobelD. (2005). Place-based education. Connecting classrooms and communities. The Orion Society.
50.
SterlingS.ThomasI. (2006). Education for sustainability: The role of capabilities in guiding university curricula. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 1(4), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJISD.2006.013735
51.
TaylorA. (2017). Beyond stewardship: Common world pedagogies for the Anthropocene. Environmental Education Research, 23(10), 1448–1461. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1325452
52.
TaylorC.HughesC. (2015). Posthuman research practices in education. Palgrave Macmillan.
53.
The United Nations General Assembly. (2013). A life of dignity for all: Accelerating progress towards the millennium development goals and advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015. United Nationshttps://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/ALifeofDignityforAll.pdf
54.
TilburyD. (2004). Rising to the challenge: Education for sustainability in Australia. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 20(2), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S081406260000224X
VaealikiS.MackeyG. (2008). Ripples of action: Strengthening environmental competency in an early childhood centre. Early Childhood Folio, 12, 7–12. https://doi.org/10.18296/ecf.0193
60.
van den BornR. J. G. (2008). Rethinking nature: Public visions in the Netherlands. Environmental Values, 17(1), 83–109. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327108X271969
61.
VygotskyL. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
WeldemariamK.WalsA. (2020). From autonomous child to a child entangled within an agentic world. In Researching early childhood education for sustainability: Challenging assumptions and OrthodoxiesRoutledge. https://www.doi.org/10.4324/9780429446764-2.
