Cooperative Inquiry

September 2016 - January 2017

In Autumn/Winter 2016 By the Fire brought together 19 UK based fashion sustainability educators in higher education to participate in a cooperative inquiry process to explore their fashion sustainability teaching practice. The project was funded by the University of the Arts London Teaching, Learning and Enhancement Research Fund.

Participants were asked to collaborate in small groups to inquire into teaching fashion sustainability to develop and deliver 'outputs' relating to these inquiries for public distribution. These outputs were entirely participant defined in order to reflect participant experiences, expertise and availability.

An account and evaluation of this project can be found below.

Project Background

The project was initiated because we identified a desire and need to bring together fashion sustainability educators to reflect on our own teaching practice and to learn from each other.

Our experience suggests that many- perhaps the majority - of the 91 higher education institutions offering 389 fashion-related courses across the UK include sustainability to some extent. The extent to which the subject is a feature of other courses varies from a one-off lecture by a guest lecture, to being embedded throughout such as BA (hons) Fashion Design at Bucks New University, MA Fashion Futures at London College of Fashion and MSc Ethics in Fashion (Communication, Consumerism and Sustainability) at Heriot Watt University. There are also internationally respected research hubs at University of the Arts London - Centre for Sustainable Fashion at London College of Fashion and Textile Environment Design at Chelsea College of Art and Design (now Centre for Circular Design).

Yet educators who are pushing fashion sustainability education forward within their institutions face institutional challenges and isolation, and there can be relatively little support for professional development.  Even where this is in place, there may be few opportunities to reflect on this teaching practice with others working in this area.

There are no known networks in the UK focusing specifically on the academic practice of teaching fashion sustainability in higher education since the end of
Labour Behind the Label’s Fashioning an Ethical Industry project in 2011, although there are a number of related networks such as Educators for Socially Responsible Apparel Practices (US), Environmental Association for Universities and Colleges, Ethical Fashion Forum, Fashion Revolution and HEA Education for Sustainable Development,.

About Cooperative Inquiry

We used cooperative inquiry as the framework for the project. Cooperative inquiry is one in which participants work collaboratively on a research project that is of interest and relevance to the participants (Heron and Reason, 2001). Heron and Reason have developed a process for how to facilitate and participate in a cooperative inquiry process. We adopted what could be described as a 'light' version of this methodology in order to work within the limitations of participants' time as well as our own.

Groups were formed at the first of two workshops using a participatory activity to gather people who had similar intentions to work together. The four cardinal directions were marked on the floor. A question ‘What would you like to get out of the By the Fire process by January’ was placed in the centre of these directions and participants were asked to write their responses to the question on pieces of card. Four pre-prepared cards were then placed on each of the directions, roughly interpreted to be aligned to the energy the sun as it moves from dawn to dusk: Inspire, Create, Harvest & Share and Reflect & Integrate. Participants were asked to place their responses to the central question on the direction they felt most closely aligned with the intention behind their response. After reading through each other’s responses, an invitation was then offered to participants to move towards one of these directions to form the cooperative inquiry groups.

The aim of these groups was to collaboratively interrogate, in a manageable way, issues of significance for the participants under the broad heading of fashion sustainability education. Throughout the process, we, the facilitators, emphasized the fact that this process should work for the participants and that the process should not be a stressful experience. The only expectations were that the groups would exchange insights, support each other and produce an output to reflect their work.

As facilitators, we did not pre-define topics of inquiry nor pre-determine measures of success or value of the inquiries. This approach was taken in part because the participants are engaged in teaching fashion sustainability in different ways, in different disciplines (e.g. design or business), with different responsibilities and in different universities. An open-ended and flexible approach is adaptable and therefore participants could direct the inquiry in way that would be of value to them.

This open-ended approach was also adopted because this participant-led approach is consistent with our values about the purpose of education. We hold an view, influenced by Freire (1979), Sterling (2001) and Vare and Scott (2007), that the intrinsic experience of education plays a part in the transformation to resilient, socially just and regenerative systems that operate within planetary boundaries. In other words, there is value in an educational experience in its own right through which critical thinking is enabled, the hidden power between the learner and the educator is addressed and where collaboration is encouraged. We also value learning about sustainability and sustainability education but our main focus was on supporting participants to identify what is important and relevant to them, rather than assuming that we could know this in advance of the project.

Since co-operative inquiries are led by participants, from the perspective of the facilitators the approach can be ambiguous and risky; we did not know what the groups were investigating. We chose to place trust in participants, which was made explicit to them, that something relevant, valuable and unique would emerge through the process.

Who participated

The research team recruited 19 UK based fashion educators teaching on BA and MA programs (a list of participants’ name can be found at the end of this page). The participants were invited to apply to participate and final participants were selected based on gaining a geographical, institutional and fashion discipline spread. The final participants represented fashion design, textiles design, fashion marketing, fashion business and critical studies for fashion and came from 10 UK institutions. Seven were from London College of Fashion, three from Manchester Metropolitan and two from Goldsmiths. The rest (seven) were sole participants from their university

Most participants already knew someone else within the group though there was great variation in the number of connections. Some would describe themselves as lecturers, with some having been involved in fashion sustainability education or over ten years, whilst others are very new to the topic.  Some have their own fashion sustainability related design and / or making practices.

In the first workshop, participants told stories of their journey to becoming someone who identifies as fashion sustainability educators. These stories were diverse.   Some studied or research fashion sustainability to masters or PhD level. Some teach design (textile and / or fashion), others teach contextual studies, business or marketing.  Some have worked in the fast fashion industry; others have refused to engage with it. Many of those that have worked in the sector have faced moments of ‘crisis’ when they have no longer been able to be part of what they regard as a damaging industry, either environmentally or in terms of social justice. Some articulated a pre-existing disposition towards fashion sustainability (nature connection, sociability, interest in people or interest in vintage fashion) that has guided their choices.

Although the group could be considered diverse in the ways described above, there was a lack of diversity in terms of gender and race.

What happened

Workshop one - September 2016

Participants attended an initial workshop in September 2016 at London College of Fashion where the co-operative inquiry process was introduced and formed.

Kate Fletcher and Dilys Williams, who are both highly respected in the field of fashion sustainability education, were invited to give opening and closing remarks at the workshop. The cooperative inquiry groups were then active from September 2016 until January 2017 when the project outputs were submitted. A second workshop was held at LCF in December 2016. All data gathered at the workshops is available on this site under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. 

The first workshop in September 2016 was designed to introduce the participants to each other, to co-create a matrix of challenges and opportunities arising in this field of teaching and find common interests within fashion sustainability pedagogy around which to form the cooperative inquiry groups.

At the beginning of the workshop participants completed a Jelly Bean Tree in order to establish baseline feeling about fashion sustainability pedagogy.  Participants also were asked to prepare an informal four minute introduction of sharing their story of how they came to teach fashion sustainability. These stories were captured on an audio recorder and transcriptions made. Listeners were asked to give feedback on postcards to the storyteller aimed at developing connections on these stories directly to the storyteller.

Participants were also asked to complete an exercise to generate ideas of ‘what would you like to get out of this process?’. These ideas formed the basis of the discussion for forming the cooperative inquiry group topics. At the end of the session in September an evaluation form was completed by each participant to benchmark their engagement in the process and to gain feedback to help shape the second workshop.

Cooperative inquiry group process

The cooperative inquiry groups managed their own time and communications independently from this point on. Therefore the cycles of action and reflection that are central to the co-operative inquiry process (Heron and Reason, 2001) have not been recorded by the facilitators. Participants articulated in evaluation forms there was a useful creative tension around managing the process within the time available by a group of busy professionals in order to produce something worthwhile yet manageable.

Workshop 2 - December

Kate Fletcher and Dilys Williams were again invited to give opening and closing remarks at the workshop. The second workshop held in December 2016 opened with a presentation by Liz Parker, project facilitator to support participants to reflect on their teaching practice and place it within a range of pedagogical and sustainability approaches drawing on Macy and Johnstone (2012); Sterling, (2001); Wattchow and Brown (2011) and WWF Scotland (2009).

During the workshop participants were asked to reflect on their current teaching practices in relation to eight aspects of sustainability education drawn from Sterling’s view of mechanistic approaches and ecological approaches and to visualise these reflections using a spidergram (eco-compass). Using these spidergrams as a prompt, participants were then asked what aspect/s of their teaching they would like to change.  The intention was to give participants a tool with which to reflect not only on their teaching practice, but also to support their reflections in the ongoing cooperative inquiry process.

Co-operative inquiry groups were then given space within the workshop to work on their collective outputs. The participants from the cooperative inquiry groups were then divided up into new small groups to both given and receive feedback on the output ideas. Participants were then invited to reflect individually on their output ideas through a guided visualisation process. The workshop concluded with an evaluation form to collect data on how the participants were feeling about the process at this interim point.

The co-operative inquiry groups continued their work after the December workshop until hand in of their final outputs in January. 

Participant feedback on the process

Some themes emerged from the evaluations completed at the September and December workshops which may be useful for similar events in the future.

Time

  • The pace of process felt good with a clear and workable timeframe that was not overwhelming although some participants were concerned they would not have enough time to deliver. In practice, some managed well within the time frame, and others were able to barely participate due to workload
  • Time for reflection during workshops was valued
  • Some would have appreciated more time to set up the cooperative inquiry groups in the initial workshop

Place

  • The institutional setting for the workshops was not liked
  • A walk during the break was offered to participants in the September workshop. Only some participants were able to take the opportunity. Of those that did walk gave very positive feedback on the experience
  • The geographic distance between some participants in the cooperative inquiry groups was challenging

People

  • Participants enjoyed sharing their personal stories and meeting each other
  • The lack of diversity within groups was viewed as problematic
  • Participants enjoyed the collaborative nature of the project, and found the opportunity to build relationships and networks and community a positive experience.

Process

  • The non-judgemental atmosphere was valued
  • Participants liked the emphasis on manageability / achievability
  • Opportunities for feedback were valued.
  • Time to work on projects and get feedback in the December workshop was seen as important

Content

  • The pedagogical presentation was valued
  • Inputs from Kate Fletcher and Dilys Williams received positive feedback.
  • There was a desire to share teaching case studies and to share teaching experience

Project outputs

Five project outputs were created as a result of the project.

In Think, Make, Do Katharine May, Alana James, Katelyn Toth-Fejal and Sarah Lees reflect on the role of creativity and experimentation in the teaching of fashion sustainability as part of the By the Fire cooperative inquiry project.  Katelyn Toth-Fejal explores the use of drawing as a tool for MA students to interrogate their relationship with nature. Alana James reflects on how to support third year design students to engage in sustainability in their work. Katharine May proposes interactions with the indigo dye bath as a location for movement and play in order to develop rituals for fashion practices to change mindsets. Finally, Sarah Lees reflects on the necessity of step by step changes in teaching students on a buying and merchandising module.

In Sustainability and Expectations in Flow, Dilys Williams, Emma Rigby and Jade Whitson-Smith consider how fashion sustainability education can be utilised to meet the needs of universities, students and educators which can at times be divergent and changing. They argue that an empathetic approach to understanding these needs is critical and begin to explore the needs of students and the pressures from HEI management. A visual narrative is produced as a model for demonstrating how the needs of the three key stakeholders can be met.

Lived Language is a collection of words with intuitive/experiential responses through visuals and text by Tara Baoth Mooney, Kate Fletcher and Ruby Hoette. The authors argue they are not necessarily offering definitions (though this might be the case for some) but depicting the practices to which the words refers, or how it makes one feel – a kind of collective glossary of words related to sustainability rather than definitions of it. This is a work in progress – an open and modifiable entity based on living experience and everyday practices…

Open letters are a series of letters intended to provoke reflection and action addressed to:

  • My colleague who is intrigued by, yet terrified of, sustainable fashion,
  • My former lecturer,
  • Someone whose decisions shape the direction of my institution,
  • My final year student, who is undecided about sustainability in design practice

The authors of the letters chose not to include their names in their output to enable the letters to speak with a voice that is relevant to the readers.

Wake Up Call is an exploration of the impact of sustainability education in fashion business education by Dr Natascha Radclyffe-Thomas (LCF), Rosemary Varley (LCF) and Lisa Trencher (MMU), which culminated to the 2017 IFTTI conference. The paper explores a series of curriculum interventions at undergraduate and postgraduate level which introduce fashion business students to the complex practical and ethical challenges for 21st century fashion businesses and the student’s response to these.

Gathering stories of value

We posed an inductive and exploratory research question at the beginning of this project, which also serves as a useful framing for the evaluation of the project: Does participating in a cooperative inquiry process add value to educators’ fashion sustainability teaching practice?

The question allows for different interpretations of ‘value’, a necessary flexibility given that the purpose of education is contested (Toohey, 1999; Sterling, 2001).  We, the researchers, and the participants in the project are likely to differ in their views on the purpose of education in general and sustainability education in particular, and in that sense, may also differ in how they determine value.  We therefore drew on Wenger, Trayner and de Laat’s 2011 framework for assessing value created through communities of practices and networks to structure our analysis (in turn an adaptation of a four-level model of Donald Kirkpatrick). This framework allows for different interpretations of value.

Wenger et al. propose there are five cycles of value creation:

‘Cycle 1. Immediate value: Activities and interactions: The most basic cycle of value creation considers networking/community activities and interactions as having value in and of themselves.’

‘Cycle 2. Potential value: Knowledge capital: Not all the value produced by a community or a network is immediately realized. Activities and interactions can produce “knowledge capital” whose value lies in its potential to be realized later.’

‘Cycle 3. Applied value: Changes in practice: Knowledge capital is a potential value, which may or may not be put into use. Leveraging capital requires adapting and applying it to a specific situation.’

‘Cycle 4. Realized value: Performance improvement: New practices or tools are not enough, even when applied. One would expect the application of new ideas to practice or the use of resources from the community/network to result in improvements in performance, but this is not guaranteed. It is therefore important not to simply assume that improved performance is the case when people change their practice, but to reflect on what effects the application of knowledge capital is having on the achievement of what matters to stakeholders, including members who apply a new practice.’

‘Cycle 5. Reframing value: Redefining success: The last cycle of value creation is achieved when social learning causes a reconsideration of the learning imperatives and the criteria by which success is defined.’

It is important not to view these as hierarchical or linear. As Wenger et al (2011) argue:

“While there are causal relationships between the various cycles, it is important not to assume a hierarchy of levels or a simple causal chain. First, learning is not a linear process with distinct phases of production and application of knowledge. When practitioners themselves produce and use knowledge, learning is a dynamic process in which producing and applying knowledge are tightly intertwined and often indistinguishable. Second, it is not the case that one cycle necessarily leads on to the other, or that a community or network is only successful if it reaches the final cycle. Different aspects are likely to be important to different stakeholders.”

A document was circulated to participants in March 2017 containing templates for two stories adapted from Wenger, Trayner and Laat (2011).  The first template asks for comments about the overall value of participation and the second template encouraged participants to share specific anecdotes from their experience.  

Value creation

Nine participants completed the story feedback forms partially or completely. This is in part explained by the fact that March is an extremely busy time in the teaching year.

Analysis of these completed forms is documented here. Following the recommendation from Wenger et al (2011) the findings are based on a mix of quantitative measures derived throughout the project and the stories provide by participants themselves in their final evaluations.

Cycle 1: Immediate value

Even though it was the busiest term in the academic calendar, 19 educators, made time to engage in an immersive experience to deepen their practice. This number dropped to 15 for the second workshop, although the participants indicated that they were disappointed they were not able to attend. Two of those that couldn’t attend the December workshop nevertheless continued to be actively involved in their cooperative inquiry group. The level of engagement in workshop activities was high in both workshops indicated by the level of verbal contributions. All groups submitted outputs and all reflected a depth of thinking about the learning of fashion sustainability, though one group reflected that there output was not as strong as they would have desired.

These are proxies to suggest that participants placed value on the learning they were gaining from the workshops in the form of levels of participation and levels of engagement. It is important not to assume that these proxies are actual measures of value, since the reasons for attendance and engagement are not clear. Nevertheless, they give some indication of potential value. 

In addition, the responses in the evaluation forms, suggest the workshops were of value in and of themselves, in a number of ways.

A range of positive comments were made about collaborating with others, particularly with others with whom they had a sense of shared purpose and experience. These discussions were a source of inspiration: I was inspired by the extent of sharing of experiences and ideas and outcomes. [P7]. The workshops also created a sense of belonging and shared experience:  Overall, I was really glad to be part of the By the Fire project. In simple terms, for a sense of belonging – being part of something new. [P2]

The workshops provided an opportunity for reflection about fashion sustainability education: This was really my first opportunity to explicitly discuss the teaching of sustainability as a standalone area… I think the real value of the workshop was being given the time and head space to think specifically about this and think deeply about how this approach could become a reality. [P1]

Engaging with other participants was seen as a source of new ideas and ways of thinking: Another key value of the workshop was the opportunity to work with academics who I had not previously worked with or crossed paths with. This provided scope for sharing different experiences and hearing new perspectives which was a great change away from the norm of my teaching practice.  [P1]

Input from other participants was also important for personal validation: Receiving such positive feedback made me realise how little my efforts are recognised in other arenas :-( [P6] I can’t tell you how important it was to get the written feedback on my story. The recognition has changed the way I feel about my professional status (positively). [P7]

Participants reported a growth in the size and quality of participants' network as a result of the project: Personally the process has led to a widening of my network and I feel I have benefited from working alongside more experienced academic professionals. [P8]

One comment warned against only working with like-minded people and called for greater diversity: It’s important to gather like-minded people to explore ideas, it would be helpful to create an environment of openness & trust with people with very different ideas, to listen to & share with too. [P3]

One participant shared that she developed empathy with students by participating in a group project: Finding ways of communicating and working with these individuals was also a new challenge as we were all from very different locations and had busy work commitments. This reminded me of group work conducted as a student at university and reminded me of the challenges our students face in this pursuit. [P1]

The opportunity to produce achievable, relevant and concrete outputs within the project was valued in its own right: The ability to engage in a small, ‘unjudged’ experiment was incredibly unusual & delightful. At a time when ‘performance’ is increasingly measured in ways that are incongruous with own ambitions [P3]

Similarly, the participatory activities used within the workshops were seen to have value in and of themselves giving an opportunity for engaged reflection: I really enjoyed the methods utilised during the workshop and the tasks set which again prompted us and allowed us time and space to consider important aspects of sustainable pedagogy carefully [P1].

Cycle 2: Potential value

A number of seeds were planted during the project that have the potential for growth.

The positive learning experience gained through the participatory learning activities is a source of inspiration for developing participants’ own teaching methods and projects. The format of materials and sessions was a great balance between academic rigor and open engagement, a great exemplar for ways to work on future projects. [P3]

The project is also seen as a prompt for future reflection on participants’ teaching practice. The project that we embarked on, whilst small, has sparked new ways to approach other elements of my work. We talk a lot about empathy, but I haven’t used other people’s perspectives criteria as a starting point in this way before. [P3]

Participants indicated increased motivation or confidence in relation to their fashion sustainability teaching practice. The project has given me renewed motivation and confidence to continue embedding sustainability into my work (and life). ... I found out what I have achieved already is more important than I had ever thought. That was amazing and inspiring. [P7]

A number of participants stated their intention to use the learning gained through the project to influence change amongst peers: As a condition of my funding to attend the workshops I need to disseminate my findings to my colleagues. This is again an exciting prospect (which I was previously quite nervous about) and I plan to host a less formal workshop using some of the methods practiced in the By the Fire project. Hopefully this can be the beginning of a journey for some of my colleagues also, providing them with the time and head space to think and reflect on their own practice and benefiting a wide discipline of creative students in the future. [P1]

And participants also indicated they felt inspired to replicate the project: I have begun to discuss the possibility of creating a network of like minded individuals [in my region] through the development of small collaborative and participatory events. [P9] and The theory introduced was really interesting and something I will be following up in the near future in the pursuit of a new project as a result of the workshop  [P1].

Cycle 3. Applied value

There are examples of projects being established and the learning being shared within just two months of the end of this project: Following on from the workshops I have started a new collaboration with another academic (out with the group allocation) and have started to think where we can take the work achieved further. Since then we have began work on a new pedagogical project which we will present at the GLAD conference in Manchester in April and we hope to take forward for journal publication at a later date. We have also conducted some primary data collection and again plan to take this further in the future.  [P1]

In addition, the project was presented at the University of the Arts Learning and Teaching Day on 21st March 2017 by one of the project leads, Liz Parker.

Cycle 4. Realized value

Realised value is the least identified value in the evaluation forms. This is not surprising given the evaluation forms were circulated just two months after the end of the project, a short time period through which impact can be made. This is certainly an area for potential follow up with participants.

Cycle 5. Reframing value

There is some suggestion that participation in the cooperative inquiry project has led to a reframing of value of institutional, professional, personal and student success.

I am not in a position to effect change within my organisation, however as I move towards increasing my teaching hours I feel that the experience of the co-operative inquiry will allow me to view the success of organisation from more perspectives. [P8]

As part of the introductions in the first session we told stories about our own interest and beliefs about sustainability and education. Listening to the others I felt my story and relevance was quite limited in comparison. However, receiving the feedback postcards of which many quoted the power of my understandings of fashion and sustainability production and education as being a female issue was uplifting. Using this idea of how others perceive our messaging has informed my decisions to persevere in developing responsible resources and curricula and engage my students with such conversations about their own agency. [P6]

Success can be passive i.e. receiving the warmth of support and mutual understanding can be more satisfying than ‘noisy’ professional recognition. [P6]

This [success] is not immediately quantifiable, but the refreshment that it brings, will nourish over time. Can you count enjoyment and food for thought? What is success if it’s not being able to be in a position to do such things – thank you – for the chance to mark my success, in being able to take part in By the Fire – taking part is success in itself [P3].

Discussion and conclusion

The aim of this project was to stimulate fashion educators in the UK to critically review and evaluate pedagogical and curriculum development approaches applied on fashion related undergraduate and postgraduate to the teaching of sustainability through reflective practice. We developed a research question to help us evaluate the impact of this activity: Does participating in a cooperative inquiry process add value to educators’ fashion sustainability teaching practice?

When we started the project, we identified the assumptions that we were making. Perhaps these can be seen as pre-conditions for the project to add value to fashion sustainability education. In other words, what would happen if these were not in place?

  • Participants are open and willing to share
  • Participants will engage in the co-operative inquiry process
  • The experience will create some change within the project timeframe
  • The diversity of experience will not hinder people’s willingness to participate
  • People want to change/improve/progress

We also expected participants to feel part of a community and to have had a positive transformational experience. The evaluation suggests these expectations were met.

We anticipated that participants would feel inspired, have expanded their understanding of teaching about sustainable fashion, have a sense of confidence about teaching about sustainable fashion and to have access to a greater range of resources (people, literature, ideas etc). Again, the evaluation of the project indicates clearly that these were met.

In addition, participants placed value on their participation in the project in unexpected ways. Empathy with students as learners was gained, and participating in a 'small, ‘unjudged’ experiment' was significant for some. The actual teaching methods were a source of inspiration for developing teaching materials and the opportunity for reflection about fashion sustainability teaching practice was viewed to have significant value.

The potential 'ripple' effect of the project (new projects, sharing learning with other participants) was also not anticipated and perhaps is an area for further support. Finally, an unanticipated outcome is the way in which some participants articulated ways in which they were adjusting how institutional, professional, personal and student success is measured.

Our overall conclusion is that a cooperative inquiry approach which enabled participants to critically review and evaluate pedagogical and curriculum development approaches applied on fashion related undergraduate and postgraduate to the teaching of sustainability through reflective practice is successful in adding value to educators’ fashion sustainability teaching practice.

Next steps

In the December workshop evaluation, we asked for participant's views about the future of By the Fire. There was full and unanimous support for some kind of network to be maintained with different options being suggested: an annual physical meet, meet in different city, have rolling membership, keep going to add depth to the learning, work with different organisations and continue the cooperative inquiry approach. The enthusiasm for continuation was palpable. We are looking at how we can develop the project further.

Participants

  • Alana James, Herriot Watt University
  • Alison Gwilt, Sheffield Hallam University
  • Amy Twigger Holroyd, Nottingham Trent University
  • Dilys Williams, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Emma Rigby, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Jade Whitson-Smith, Huddersfield University
  • Joanna Blanco-Velo, Manchester Metropolitan University
  • Julia Crew, Ravensbourne
  • Kate Fletcher, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Katelyn Toth-Fejel, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Katherine May, Goldsmiths, University of London
  • Lisa Trencher, Manchester Metropolitan University
  • Natascha Radclyffe-Thomas, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Nina Stevenson, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Rosemary Varley, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London
  • Ruby Hoette, Goldsmiths, University of London
  • Sara Han, Manchester Metropolitan University
  • Sarah Lees, University of South Wales
  • Tara Baoth, University of Wolverhampton

 

References

Friere, P (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed: London, Continuum

Heron, J. & Reason, P. (2001) ‘The Practice of Co-operative Inquiry: Research with rather than on people’ in P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage

Macy, J. and Johnstone, C. (2012) Active Hope, California: New World Library

Sterling, S (2001) Sustainable Education: Re-visioning learning and change. Totnes: Green Books for The Schumacher Society

Toohey, S. (1999) Designing Courses for higher education. Buckingham: Open University

Wattchow, B. & Brown, M. (2011) A Pedagogy of Place: Outdoor Education for a Changing World. Melbourne: Monash University Publishing [Online book]

Wenger, E., Trayner, B., and de Laat, M. (2011) Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a conceptual framework. Rapport 18, Ruud de Moor Centrum, Open University of the Netherlands. [Online] Available at: http://wenger-trayner.com/resources/publications/evaluation-framework/

WWF Scotland (2009) Natural Change: Psychology and Sustainability [Online]