.

Teaching and Learning Resource (TLR)

1. Title

‘Water on the Moon’ Part 1: Simulated Debate

2. Keywords

wilderness, ‘natural’ resources, science-technology-environment relationships, contested knowledge claims, mass media, simulated debate.

3. Introduction

Assuming that recent scientific claims concerning water on the Moon are upheld, it seems inevitable that commercial and other pressures for lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation will intensify.

The TLR takes this scenario, and associated mass media coverage, as its point of departure. It addresses philosophical, political and sociological questions concerning the science-technology-environment relationship, albeit from a novel perspective. Indeed this ‘lunar’ case study is designed, in part, precisely to cast analogous ‘terrestrial’ environmental issues (for example, concerning competition for resources and the future of wilderness areas) - including the interplay of corporate and political interests and values in public debate and decision-making - in sharper relief.

This TLR can be used independently, or may precede one or both of:

• ‘Water on the Moon’ Part 2: Critical Media Text Analysis
• ‘Water on the Moon’ Part 3: Letters to the Editor

In this first exercise, students take part in a simulated debate, of the kind broadcast on current affairs and specialist science/environment programmes - variously playing roles in favour of, opposed to, and neutral on the question of lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation. In the second TLR, they apply skills of critical thinking - and, in particular, of critical textual analysis - to a newspaper article which discusses recent claims by NASA and others, concerning water on the Moon. In the third exercise, students write a letter about the issue - of the kind that might be sent to the editor of a newspaper or magazine - written from the perspective of a participant in the simulated debate.

From an educational point of view, learning through simulation (either in an oppositional ‘debating’ forum, and/or by means of letter writing) encourages students’ active engagement with the subject matter. Specifically in relation to controversial environmental (and other) issues, it can be used to promote empathy with (or at least, enhanced understanding of) points of view to which they do not personally subscribe.

The written work associated with this exercise (i.e. two ‘position statements: see below, Instructions to students) can be assessed.

4. Aim

This TLR provides a framework for active learning, which invites students to address philosophical, political and sociological (especially media-related) questions concerning science-technology-environment relationships.

5. Learning outcomes

Students who have successfully engaged with this TLR will:

• Have critically examined a range of perspectives in environmental philosophy and ethics, including those to which they do not personally subscribe.
• Have actively explored - in part by means of (simulated) direct experience - sociological and political questions pertaining to knowledge claims-makers (e.g. pressure groups, government) and the mass media.
• Have gained - by virtue of (simulated) direct experience - familiarity with broadcast debates, which are commonly used for covering controversial issues.
• Have undertaken background research, involving print-based and Internet sources.
• Have gained experience in marshalling arguments and evidence in an oppositional ‘debating’ forum.
• Have exercised and developed generic communicative skills (e.g. listening, debating, collaborating).

6. Pre-requisites

This TLR requires some knowledge of relevant philosophical, political and sociological questions, including the diversity of ethical stances on controversial environmental issues; and the behaviour of corporate, political and other claims-makers. TLRs which may assist in the development of these pre-requisites are:

• Approaches in Environmental Ethics
• Classifying Environmentalism: A Critical Introduction to Technocentrism and Ecocentrism
• Deep Ecology: A Critical Introduction
• The Brent Spar Conflict: Making Sense of the Greenpeace Case

Familiarity with the mass media’s use of broadcast debates for covering controversial issues, is desirable but not essential. The following TLR examines mass media representations of environment/nature in general (i.e. with no specific focus on broadcast debates):

• EnviroFile: Representations of environment/nature in the mass media

Similarly, experience of simulated debate, as a basis for learning, is desirable but not essential. Where this is absent, students should be carefully briefed as to its educational objectives, and to prepare for a learning experience which they may find personally, as well as intellectually, challenging.

7. How to use TLR

Much of the proposed operationalisation of this TLR is detailed below (see Instructions to students). A suggested programme of activities is also given in the table below, which has been designed with a class of up to 32 students in mind.

For a class of approximately this size, it is suggested that the debate be repeated four times, with around eight student participants (each playing a different role) on each occasion. The optimum number of participants in a debate is probably between six and eight; on each occasion there should be approximately equal numbers of students playing roles in favour of, opposed to, and neutral on the question of lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation. A model for allocating students to roles, and to each of four debates, is provided in Appendix One.

Debates should be chaired by the tutor, preferably playing the role of a well-known current affairs or specialist (e.g. science or environment) journalist.

The optimum time allocation for each debate is probably around 60 minutes; this should allow sufficient time for last-minute briefing (approximately ten minutes), for the debate itself (about 40 minutes) - and for debriefing (at least ten minutes), which is particularly important where students have little prior experience of the personal and intellectual challenges associated with learning through simulated debate.

Debriefing should invite participants to comment on the personal and intellectual challenges associated with learning through simulation, and on the perceived educational benefits and disbenefits; this may include case-specific and more general discussion. Students might also be asked to reflect more directly and personally on their own performance in, and preparedness for, the simulation event.

7. Instructions to students

Stage One: Preparation

Prepare to play two roles in the debate. These will fall into two of the following three categories, as assigned by your tutor:

1. A representative of an organisation that broadly supports lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation. You will be assigned by your tutor to a real-life ‘supporting’ organisation such as AEA Technology (AEA), British National Space Programme (BNSP), European Space Agency (ESA), North American Space Agency (NASA), Matra Marconi Space (MMS) - but will need to invent a credible role for yourself, after consultation with your tutor (e.g. as that organisation’s Director of Public Relations, or as a senior scientist).

2. An individual or representative of an organisation that is broadly neutral on the question of lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation. ‘Neutral’ roles may be political, academic or journalistic, and should be invented (by you, after consultation with your tutor) but credible.

3. An individual or representative of an organisation that broadly opposes lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation. ‘Opposed’ roles may be academic, journalistic or affiliated to a ‘lunar’ pressure group; your choice should be made in consultation with your tutor, and should be either entirely invented, but credible, or modelled on real-life (for example, ‘lunar’ pressure groups might be modelled on ‘terrestrial’ environmental pressure groups such as Earth First!, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace).

For each of the two roles you should:

• Use the recommended print and Internet sources to assemble background information. In the case of real-life ‘supporting’ organisations, this should consist of information about the general purpose of the organisation, and the nature and scope of its activities. In the case of ‘neutral’ or ‘opposing’ roles, this should consist of information about the individual’s job, interests and values - and, if appropriate, about the organisation to which you are affiliated (eg its aims, objectives, values and modus operandi) - all invented by you.
• Produce a written ‘position statement’ of not more than 400 words. Each statement should briefly identify, and provide arguments in support of, the individual’s or organisation’s position concerning lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation. Arguments may be aesthetic, commercial, cultural, economic, ethical, philosophical, political, scientific, social, spiritual or technological in nature - and must be consistent with the background information concerning the individual or organisation. They should be supported by references to the print and Internet sources you have consulted. You should bring two copies of each position statement to the debate.
• Prepare an oral presentation, of not more than two minutes, based on the position statement, which can be given at the start of the simulated debate.

Stage Two: The Debate

On the day of the debate, the tutor will tell you which one of your two roles you will actually play. You should then give one copy of the relevant position statement to your tutor, who will use it to assist him/her in chairing the debate. Once the debate begins, it is essential that you stay in role until your tutor indicates that the simulation has ended, and debriefing has begun. Debriefing will give you an opportunity to reflect on the experience, including the personal and intellectual challenges associated with learning through simulated debate.

At the start of the debate, the chair will ask each participant to introduce themselves, and to make a two minute presentation. All participants will then be invited to engage in open debate, during which they should seek to argue for their own position and against those who are opposing them. At all times, the chair will seek to make sure that the discussion stays ‘on topic’, that it is conducted in an appropriate manner, that it is balanced, and that each participant has an equal opportunity to contribute. You are advised to take notes during the debate; these should help you respond to comments made by other participants.

9. Stimulus Material

Students should be given guidelines based on the Instructions to students (see above); they should also have access to the Internet, and at least some of the print sources listed below (see Recommended reading).

10. Degree stage

The learning outcomes associated with this TLR are unlikely to be attainable by students below undergraduate Level 2; indeed, they may not be fully achievable before Level 3, unless there has been some emphasis on environmental politics and philosophy (including mass media portrayal of environmental issues).

11. Resource requirements

This TLR can operate in any small- to medium-sized teaching room, provided that furniture can be arranged to facilitate the simulated debate.

12. Preparation

This TLR requires careful organisation and briefing of students, by the tutor (see above, How to use TLR and Instructions to students). It also requires effective preparation by students and tutor alike, using the recommended print and Internet sources (see below, Recommended reading).

13. Links with other TLRs

This TLR is the first of a three-part set, which also includes:

• ‘Water on the Moon’ Part 2: Critical Media Text Analysis
• ‘Water on the Moon’ Part 3: Letters to the Editor

As indicated in the Pre-requisites (above), there is some commonality between this TLR and:

• Approaches in Environmental Ethics
• Classifying Environmentalism: A Critical Introduction to Technocentrism and Ecocentrism
• Deep Ecology: A Critical Introduction
• EnviroFile: Representations of environment/nature in the mass media
• The Brent Spar Conflict: Critical Analysis of the Greenpeace Case

More generally, the aims and/or learning outcomes of this TLR are related to those of other TLRs listed in the following 'thematic clusters':

• Environment and the mass media
• Case studies

14. Follow-up activities

Audio- or video-recording of the ‘debate’ would allow participants an opportunity to evaluate their performances, either in terms of the arguments and evidence presented and/or in respect of their wider ‘debating’ skills.

The teaching and learning methods deployed here could be adapted for use in connection with other environmental issues which involve contested values and/or science (e.g. proposed road or other civil engineering schemes).

15. Recommended reading

• The mass media

Allen, S et al (eds) (2000) Environmental Risks and the Media. Routlegde

Anderson, A (1997) Media, Culture and the Environment. UCL Press, London

Curran, J (1990) ‘Cultural Perspectives of News Organisations: A Reappraisal and a Case Study’. In M Ferguson (ed) Public Communication: The New Imperatives: Future Directions for Media Research. Sage Publications

Eldridge, J (ed) (1993). Getting the Message: News, Truth and Power. Routledge

Fowler, R (1991) Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. Routledge, London

The Guardian (1999) The 2000 Media Guide. The Guardian

Hansen, A (ed) (1993) The Mass Media and Environmental Issues. Leicester University Press

Vujakovic, P (1998) ‘Reading between the lines: using news media materials for geography’, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, volume 22, number 1, pp147-155

• Pressure group activity

Rose, C (1993) ‘Achieving change’. In F Goldsmith and A Warren (eds) Conservation in Progress (pp116-183). John Wiley & Sons
This looks at how NGOs campaign, and touches briefly on their use of arguments based on intangible values and utilitarian benefits. A mainly practical essay on how to achieve change, it explains what a campaign is and what it is not: it is not awareness-raising or education but a way of eliminating doubt and building up certainty to the point where people are motivated to act. He gives the basic principles of campaigning - the process and the methodology, necessary elements and reasons for success and failure.

Young, S C (1993) The Politics of the Environment. Baseline Books
Handy guidebook to environmental problems facing government, protest, green parties, how they work etc.

Potter, D (1996) ‘NGOs and environmental policies’. In P Glasbergen and A Blowers (eds) Environmental Policy in an International Context, 3: Prospects for Environmental Change. Arnold, Hodder Headline
Gives an overview of NGOs, what they are and how they work, the constraints and opportunities. Discusses whether they are successful in influencing policy and the factors for assessing effectiveness.

• Ethical aspects of science-technology-environment relationships

Stevenson, L (1993) ‘Is scientific research value-neutral’? In S Armstrong and R Botzler (eds) Environmental Ethics: Divergence and Convergence (pp9-16). McGraw Hill

Brown, D A (1993) ‘Ethics, Science and Regulation’. In S Armstrong and R Botzler (eds) Environmental Ethics: Divergence and Convergence (pp17-29). McGraw Hill
About how technology is assessed without reference to ethical or social questions.

Hartmann W K (1984) ‘Space exploration and environmental issues’. Environmental Ethics, vol 6 (Fall), pp227-239
Looks at it from various angles, including ‘space as wilderness’.

• Environmental philosophy

Fox, W (1990) Towards a Transpersonal Ecology; Developing New Foundations for Environmentalism. Shambhala Publications, Mass., USA (also has British publisher, Green Books?)
About Deep Ecology and Naess (but Chapter 6 also provides a good overview of a range of ecophilosophical positions)

Devall, B and Sessions, G (1985) Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered. Gibbs Smith, Layton, Utah
Includes chapters on wilderness and resource conservation

Regan, T (1982) ‘The nature and possibility of an environmental ethic’ (chapter 9, pp184-205 ) in All that Dwell Within: Essays on Animal Rights and Environmental Ethics. University of California Press
Looks at the concept of inherent value and applies it to non-animal nature.

• Journals

Environmental Ethics

Environmental Values

Environmental Politics

Media, Culture and Environment

• Websites

http://www.ari.net/back2moon.html
Should we return to the moon? A world wide web public policy forum

http://www.sciam.com/explorations/1998/0316moon/
Forum to discuss exploration from various viewpoints, viz the moon should be open to commercial exploitation; development should be regulated; it should be left alone.

http://www.sciam.com/explorations/1998/0309
Pieces from Scientific American about the discovery of water on the moon.

http://www.geodata.soton.ac.uk/hypermail/envsci/group2/topic4
Discussion of water on the moon

http://www.lycosuk.co.uk/webguides/technology/t_moon.html
Moon webguide

http://www.suwa.org/
Website for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. The Utah wilderness is under threat from mining.

http://gree.ca/issues/econo/deepE.html
On Deep Ecology

http://www.aeat.co.uk
AEA Technology

http://www.esa.int
European Space Agency

http://www.lunar.arc.nasa.gov/
NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration - USA)

http://www.highview.co.uk
BNSP (United Kingdom Space Agency)

http://www.matra-marconi-space.com/
Matra Marconi Space

http://open.gov.uk
The British Government

http://www.dra.hmg.gb/dera.htm
DERA (Defence Evaluation and Research Agency)

Appendix One

Allocation of Roles