‘Water on the Moon’ Part 3: Letters to the Editor

Teaching and Learning Resource (TLR)

1. Title

‘Water on the Moon’ Part 3: Letters to the Editor

2. Keywords

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

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 is designed to follow on from one or (preferably) both of:

In the first of these exercises, 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 this third exercise, students write letters - from the perspectives of parties variously in favour of, opposed to, and neutral on the question of lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation - of the kind which might be sent to the editor of a newspaper or magazine.

From an educational point of view, learning through simulation (either by means of letter writing, and/or in an oppositional ‘debating’ forum) 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 (‘position statements’ and letters: 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, 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. interest groups, pressure groups, government) and the mass media.
Have gained, by virtue of (simulated) direct experience, familiarity with a commonly-used print media device for covering controversial issues.
Have given particular consideration to one print medium, and to the possibilities for advancing credible and persuasive arguments within that particular medium (including the use of reasoning and rhetoric).
Have undertaken background research, involving printed and electronic sources.

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:

Familiarity with mass media portrayal of controversial environmental issues would also be advantageous. The following TLR examines mass media representations of environment/nature in general (i.e. with no exclusive focus on issues which are widely recognised as ‘controversial’, or on any particular media or genres):

EnviroFile: Representations of Environment/Nature in the Mass Media

Finally, some experience of learning by simulation is desirable but not essential. However students who lack experience of this kind should be carefully briefed as to its educational objectives.

7. How to use TLR

If students have taken part in the simulated debate (‘Water on the Moon’ Part 1: Simulated Debate) prior to engaging with this TLR, they may be asked to write one letter only, from the perspective of one of the two roles they prepared to play in the debate (either prescribed by the tutor, or according to their choice). However, if the debate itself is not held, they should be asked to write at least two letters, from contrasting viewpoints. The following Instructions to students are premised on this latter scenario.

For a class of up to 32 students, Appendix One of ‘Water on the Moon’ Part 1: Simulated Debateprovides a model for allocating students to roles. Tutorial support should be provided during the preparation stage.

5. Instructions to students

Part One: Preparing ‘position statements’

You will need to undertake research on two existing or fictional ‘knowledge claims-makers’ in the debate about water on the Moon. 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, World Wide Fund for Nature).

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 one side of A4 paper. Each statement should outline, 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, religious, 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.

Part Two: Writing ‘letters to the editor’

Write two letters, of not more than 250 words each, addressed to the editor of an appropriate newspaper or magazine of your choice. You should write from the perspectives of each of the two roles you have researched; and should argue their case (concerning lunar exploration, colonisation and resource exploitation) as credibly and persuasively as possible, possibly with reference to opposing organisations and their arguments.

You will need to ensure that your letters are written in a manner which is appropriate for that particular medium’s letters page. In order to do so, you should familiarise yourself with:

The publication itself and its audience (for example, by visiting its website and/or by consulting a media reference source: see below, Recommended reading).
The reasoning (e.g. use of science) and rhetoric characteristically used to communicate ‘arguments’ within that medium.

9. Stimulus Material

Students should be given guidelines based on the Instructions to students (see above); and should have access to the electronic - 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 requires access to the recommended print and Internet sources (see below, Recommended reading) and to accommodation suitable for providing tutorial support.

12. Preparation

This TLR requires careful organisation and briefing of students (see above, Pre-requisites and How to use TLR).

13. Links with other TLRs

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

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

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

No follow-up activities are particularly recommended. However, a poster display of position statements and letters might facilitate peer and/or self-evaluation, perhaps with students working in pairs or small groups.

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.aet.co.uk
AEA Technology

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)