As we have been swinging on the metaphorical swing of ENVS 160 this semester, the time has finally come for us to jump off and leap onto the path ahead. I took this class to see if the ENVS major is the best fit for me, and though I’m not continuing on the environmental studies path, that doesn’t mean the tools and lessons I learned in this course will go to waste. In fact, I will carry all that I’ve learned in ENVS 160 with me, and it will help me on any path I choose to take.
Academically, I will probably be continuing with Biology or Psychology (or both), and the spirit of openness and making connections that are so embedded in an interdisciplinary program, such as ENVS, will allow whatever I study to permeate disciplinary boundaries. The ability to build connections between seemingly unlike things allows people to find their niche and apply their learning to more than just their academic life, so I’m very grateful that ENVS 160 has provided a place to practice interdisciplinary skills.
As I mentioned in my first post, writings by Hulme (2009) and Steinberg (2015) both helped me understand the importance of context. In terms of solving problems, action should depend on the context of the situation, and this concept is applicable to many disciplines. Attempting to understand contexts and using a framework that is place-situated can be helpful when looking at environmental problems, biological phenomena, or when examining the impact situations can have on human behavior.
In addition, as I mentioned in a previous post, Steinberg’s emphasis on the capacity of simple questions, such as why, have affirmed my belief in the value of learning actively and questioning material (Steinberg 2015, 268). In order to change my schemas and truly grow and change, it is not enough to passively learn or follow institutional rules. As someone armed with the ability to create institutional change, I must use my voice and question the way things work, for that is the way to create change and perhaps even change the rules (Steinberg 2015).
Though I won’t be majoring in Environmental Studies, I still care deeply about the future of our planet, and I plan to be a more active, informed participant in conversations about policies that impact anthropogenic climate change. Actually, I began this semester pretty weary of politics, policies, and institutional rules, but now I’m realizing that all my actions are in some way governed by rules (Steinberg 2015, 21). Learning breeds awareness, but that awareness must be translated into conversation and action. In terms of my individual actions, I will continue to be a vegetarian who enjoys recycling, but I will do so with realization that contributing in that way is not nearly enough (Steinberg 2015).
To address the complex issues we are facing, such as rising sea levels and a decrease in biodiversity, there is not one simple action to take, but a variety of actions. I believe critical and thoughtful conversations are still important, and when having these conversations, I will be weary of what Professor Proctor refers to as Big Words, for hiding behind big concepts can prohibit deeper thinking.
All in all, I’m very glad to have taken this course and I will continue to process and question both the ideas I had when I entered this class and the hurricane of ideas ENVS 160 has exposed me to. The ideas of forming connections, acting institutionally, exploring context, and thinking critically will stay with me long after I jump off the ENVS 160 swing and find my path in the complex world below.
Citations
Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Steinberg, Paul F. 2015. Who Rules the Earth?: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.