Multicultural Perspectives through Music & Sustainability Education

Full text

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
22
Sustainability Education
Roger Coss is a K-12 educator
and a doctoral student
in currciulum and instruction
at the Benerd School of Education
attheUniversityofthePacic,
Stockton,California.
briefly summarize Reimer’s synergistic
philosophy of music education—specifical-
ly his discussion of the feeling dimension
of music—and demonstrate how the field
of multicultural environmental education
is increasingly recognizing the role of emo-
tions in teaching and learning. Utilizing
Reimer’s philosophy, I will conclude with a
discussion of music education in education
for sustainability through a multicultural
perspective.
Multicultural
Environmental Education
The ecological crisis is being framed as
a “cultural crisis” in which people are encul-
tured to think and live in relationship to the
world and the people that surround them
(Martusewicz, Edmundson, & Lupinacci,
2011, p. 8). Driving this cultural crisis is
Humanity has recently steered itself
into an era of environmental instability
where the earth is ravaged of its natural
resources, where the biodiversity of living
organisms is decreasing everyday, and
where a rapidly growing human popula-
tion has become a driving factor in an
impending ecological crisis (Rockström et
al., 2009; Steffen et al., 2011). Research
is increasingly focusing on the roles and
responsibilities of public schooling in
addressing this crisis (Cassell & Nelson,
2012; Nelson, 2010; Orr, 2004; Stone &
Barlow, 2005). However, explicit discussion
on the role of music education is being
largely neglected. What are the roles and
responsibilities of music educators in ad-
dressing the impending ecological crisis?
The purpose of this article is to discuss
implications for the relationship of music
education to education for sustainability
within the framework of multicultural
education.1 Bennett Reimer’s (2003) syn-
ergistic philosophy of music education
provides a conceptual lens through which
to make this connection in a way that not
only keeps to the integrity of music edu-
cation as a discipline, but also addresses
issues in multicultural education.
I will first discuss how the field of mul-
ticultural environmental education is mak-
ing space to address multicultural issues
in education for sustainability. I will then
Multicultural Perspectives
through Music & Sustainability Education
Roger Coss

FALL 2013
23
A Multicultural Interdisciplinary Inquiry
a conflict of values—values of economic
and technological salvation rather than
ecological responsibility (Callenbach, 2005).
Within this is a technology-dependent hope
that requires a new way of thinking, what
Cassell and Nelson (2010) argue is “a fun-
damental transformation in support of the
development of a new paradigm, a new lens
through which the Western mind can adjust
its view of society, education and learning,
citizenship, and the nature of human habi-
tation on Earth” (p. 183).
Public schools can help our current
“value structure evolve toward a more
viable long-term approach to systemic
global problems” (Edwards, 2005, p. 23).
Superficial reforms such as adding an
environmental unit or having a once-a-
year field trip outdoors are not part of the
solution to the problem. Rather, as Nolet
(2009) argues, we need a “fundamental
change in the educational culture” (p.
418). Educators are now being challenged
to think afresh their own roles and re-
sponsibilities in preparing students to
live in an era of increasing environmental
decay (Nelson, 2010).
Stevenson et al. (2013, p. 2) identifies
five general characteristics of education
for sustainability:
U It questions ideological norms and as-
sumptions on the nature and purpose(s) of
education—in particular the relationship
between education and ethics—and views
these as fundamental to environmental
education (Jickling & Wals, 2013).
U It embraces a complex, interdisciplin-
ary understanding of the relationships
between people, society, and the environ-
ment (Edwards, 2005).
UIt is concerned with not only knowledge
and values, but also with fostering the
means and opportunities for taking ac-
tion on environmental and sustainability
issues (Coss, 2013).
UTeaching and learning occurs not only
in formal institutional settings such as
schools and classrooms, but also in infor-
mal and public contexts (Sobel, 2004).
UIt embraces both local and global per-
spectives (Gough, 2013).
A significant focus in education for
sustainability is on the recognition of the
socio-cultural dimension for addressing
the impending ecological crisis. There al-
ready exists an empirical (Gaughan, 1996),
theoretical (Grass, 1995), and pedagogical
(Liao, Larke, & Hill-Jackson, 2011) tradi-
tion for addressing these socio-cultural
issues through the lens of multicultural
education. As defined by Marouli (2002),
multicultural environmental education
“highlights the importance of reaching
out to culturally diverse populations and
of understanding, respecting, and utilizing
their perspectives in environmental edu-
cation” (p. 28; see also Cole, 2007; Grass,
1994, 1995; Peter, 1998).
In her exploratory study of both
non-profit and university multicultural
environmental education programs in the
U.S., Marouli (2002) found in this field the
emergence of two theoretical traditions:
(1) the environmental justice movement
with its recognition and representation
of the worldviews of marginalized people
(e.g., Lewis & James, 1995); and (2) mul-
ticultural education that values “cultural
pluralism and aims for cross-cultural un-
derstanding” (Marouli, 2002, p. 32).
Reimer’s Feeling Dimension
of Music
Bennett Reimer’s (2003) synergistic
philosophy of music education provides a
philosophical base upon which to discuss
how music education addresses multicul-
tural issues in a way that stays true to
its uniqueness as an art form. He argues
that “every experience of art, whether
creating it or sharing it, ‘makes special’ in
the way only art can accomplish” (p. 69).
The uniqueness of the musical experience,
then, lies in its focused engagement with
the world of sounds, as opposed to strictly
visual, textual, or movement-based expe-
riences. This philosophy is “synergistic”
in how it applies a pluralistic stance on
historically contended concerns in the
philosophy of music—including music as
formed sounds, music as practice, music
as a means for social change, the bound-
aries of music and music education, and
the relationship between music and utili-
tarian values. “The central task of music
education,” he proposes, “is to make mu-
sical experience in all its manifestations
as widely available to all people, and as
richly cultivated for each individual, as
possible” (p. 69).
Reimer’s (2003) philosophy is ground-
ed in five fundamental aspects of musical
experience: feeling (or emotion)2; creating;
making meaning; cultural and historical
context(s); and multiple intelligences.
Particularly significant in the intent of this
article is a focus on the feeling dimension.
He argues for the “emotional dimension
of music as being a defining characteris-
tic of it” and is the “basis for its power to
heighten, sustain, refine, and extend hu-
man emotional life” (p. 73). Music reaches
its fullest potential through immersion
into this emotional world.
It is because of the traditional West-
ern idea of reason, not emotion, being the
epitome of human functioning that music
has been relegated to extra-curricular
status in educational frameworks. How-
ever, understandings of the relationship
between intellect, intelligence, and emo-
tion have begun to shift (Reimer, 2003, p.
75). We have too long thought of emotion
as an unnecessary dimension of concep-
tualizing intelligence. Rather, “emotions
work hand-in-hand with our rational
mind,” creating a sort of co-dependent
and reciprocal relationship between the
two (Robinson, 2011, p. 186). If, then, one
dimension of the musical experience is for
the enhancement, extension, and deepen-
ing of humanity’s felt emotional experi-
ences, music education serves to enhance
the effectiveness—as well as expand the
opportunity—for musical involvement to
all individuals.
Emotions in Multicultural
Environmental Education
Emotions are of paramount impor-
tance in students’ reflections on beliefs,
norms, values, and assumptions of their
own culture, though they have been
traditionally omitted from education for
sustainability frameworks (Boiger & Mes-
quita, 2012; Harré, Armon-Jones, Lutz, &
Averill, 1986; Martusewicz, 2001; Zeyer
& Kelsey, 2013). Sinha (2010) notes that
drawing out discomforting emotions from
students, such as guilt, anger, resentment,
fear, or ambivalence flowing from social,
A significant focus in education for sustainability
is on the recognition of the socio-cultural dimension
for addressing the impending ecological crisis.
There already exists an empirical, theoretical,
and pedagogical tradition for addressing these socio-cultural issues
through the lens of multicultural education.

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
24
Sustainability Education
end result, but rather a means for more
fully engaging in the feeling dimension.
It is through actual engagement with the
sounds of music itself that awareness of
feelings is most authentically felt.
Immediation
Reimer’s second principle is that mu-
sic does not serve a “mediating function,”
as words, numbers, or musical notation
symbols do (2003, p. 95). Musical sound is
primarily meant to be felt, not to symbolize
and portray some idea, message, or belief.
Reimer (2003) explains that:
The way music accomplishes its affective
presence to us is not, at root, by pointing
us to something outside its inherent na-
ture as ‘sounds-in-meaningful-configura-
tions,’ but by taking us into these sounds
directly and thereby into the cultural
meanings they have embodied. (p. 95)
Witnessing
Reimer’s third principle emphasizes
the cultural-sharing aspect of the feeling
dimension—the reciprocal relationship
between maker and hearer. He empha-
sizes the importance of not only making
musical sounds by composers, performers,
or improvisors, but also sharing them.
“Music,” argues Reimer, “is a culture-
creating and individual-creating act, and
those who witness are key players in its
full functioning” (p. 97).
His use of the term “witness” refers
to the “inner construction of feeling” that
must necessarily occur between the music
maker and receiver. Both players have a
role. Music educators are to “help reveal
to both musicians and listeners more and
more of the inherent workings of music so
that the possibilities of feeling they contain
become more available” (p. 98).
Challenging Binaries
through Music Education
As discussed above, the field of
multicultural environmental education
legitimizes and recognizes emotions as
crucial for engaging and questioning stu-
dents’ own culture as well as essential for
building cross-cultural understandings.
The very inclusion of music education in
educational contexts directly challenges
the traditionally-held emotion/reason di-
chotomy. This duality is being challenged,
as Wang (2008) argues:
The dynamics of emotions in multicultural
education is an important issue. Such
attention, however, does not isolate the
role of emotion in pedagogy, but calls for
the unity of intellect and feeling in the
cultural, racial, political, or religious divi-
sions within society, serve as a conduit for
students’ ability to interpret the world
around them and respond to others in more
socially aware ways (p. 112). Engagement
of emotions in learning contexts not only
facilitates student reflection, but is also
viewed as a transformative act. “Educa-
tion of emotions,” argues Wang (2008), “is
crucial to destabilizing social hierarchies
which privilege rationality, logic, control,
and, thus, dominance” (p. 11).
Education for sustainability is chal-
lenging educators to rethink thinking
and learning with a wider conception of
intelligence in mind (Cassell & Nelson,
2010; Goleman, 2009; Goleman, Bennett,
& Barlow, 2012). It is on this legitimiza-
tion of emotion that Daniel Goleman
builds his idea of ecological intelligence.
He states that “just as social and emo-
tional intelligence build on the abilities to
take other people’s perspective, feel with
them, and show our concern, ecological
intelligence extends this capacity to all
natural systems” (Goleman, 2009, p. 44).3
Emotional intelligence is beginning to be
seen as necessary to cultivate the ways of
thinking necessary to promote sustainable
values and behaviors (Goleman, Barlow, &
Bennett, 2010; Michael, 2005).
Addressing Multicultural Issues
through the Feeling Dimension
of Music
In what ways are multicultural issues
addressed through Reimer’s feeling di-
mension of musical experience? How does
addressing these issues fit in an education
for sustainability framework? It is first
necessary to ring a note of caution against
articulating the role of music education in
utilitarian terms. Reimer (2003) so timely
reminds music educators fighting to keep
their practice in schools that:
Advocacy arguments, intended to per-
suade the larger community to support
music programs as part of schooling
rather than as an out-of-school activity
for those who choose it, have tended to
focus on whatever values happen to be
important to people at various times, at-
tempting to convince people that music
can serve those values and therefore
should be allowed a place at the education
table. (p. 63)
He mentions several of these utilitarian
values: raising test scores, improving spa-
tial-temporal reasoning, making people
“smarter,” supporting pedagogy in other
disciplines, and improving self-discipline
and social skills (p. 63). Justifying music
education as such requires valuing it as
a means rather than an end. Rather, as
Reimer argues, it is for the enhanced en-
gagement in the emotional world of musi-
cal sound that music education should be
justified.
Turner and Freedman (2004) discuss
music as a “tool,” that is “builds empathy,”
and that it serves to “inspire environmental
action and advocacy” (p. 45). Allen (2012)
argues that ecomusicology contributes to
an interdisciplinary approach of “learning
about the natural world” and will poten-
tially “bridge disciplines in creative ways
to improve students’ analytical reasoning
and environmental problem-solving skills”
(p. 193). Ramsey (2002) discusses a role
of music in environmental education as
“a tool that can make both teaching and
learning more interesting” (p. 195). Though
these authors begin to scratch the surface
on the role of music education in education
for sustainability, the conversation needs
to be shifted towards the role of music in
the world of emotional experience.
Furthermore, if music education fo-
cuses on multicultural issues in education
for sustainability, then it needs to do so
through the actual emotional experiences
of the students. Any discussion on the
role(s) of music education should keep the
uniqueness of the musical experience at
the forefront of teaching and learning. For
these reasons I again implore educators
to seriously consider the importance of a
philosophical base upon which to ground
their pedagogy. I agree with Reimer’s
argument that the engagement into the
feeling dimension of music is what com-
promises that uniqueness of the musical
experience.
Framework for the Education
of Feelings
Building on the work of cultural
anthropologist Robert Plant Armstrong
(1975), Reimer presents a tripartite
framework for teaching for the education
of feelings:
Direct Representation
Reimer’s (2003) first principle of
teaching for the education of feelings is
that the feeling dimension is most fully
experienced through “direct engagement
with the sounds of music themselves”
(p. 95). Aspects of music education such
as knowledge of music theory, historical
facts, philosophy, and cultural background
information are not themselves the desired

FALL 2013
25
A Multicultural Interdisciplinary Inquiry
classroom to open up a creative dwelling
space in which both teachers and students
can risk personal and cultural transforma-
tion. Such is a vision of sustainable and
creative multicultural education. (p.16)
Inclusion and legitimization of emotions
through music education challenges the
hegemonic epistemology of reason over
that of emotion.
Cross-Cultural Understanding
through Music Education
Music affords students the opportu-
nities to place themselves into the lived
experiences of cultures distant from their
own. Joseph (2012) demonstrates how
music serves to “address cultural diver-
sity and build intercultural relations and
understandings” when he teaches his
Australian students to sing, dance, and
play African music (p. 9). He argues that
“the teaching and learning of African music
allows students to develop and increase
their knowledge, skills, and understanding
towards each other” (p. 1).
River of Words (ROW) is an interna-
tional K-12 program that invites students
to practice place-based learning through
an environmental poetry and art contest
on the theme of watersheds. “Children,”
explains Pamela Michael, cofounder and
executive director, “engage the world with
their whole selves—conscious and uncon-
scious, emotional and cognitive” (Michael,
2005, p. 111). She further explains:
Our strategy was to create rich sensory
experiences for students, encouraging
them to explore their communities and
imaginations—weaving in natural and
cultural history— and to synthesize what
they had learned and observed into line
and verse…. We tried to add elements of
wonder, discovery, interpretation, dexter-
ity, and surprise to learning, and to pro-
mote our belief that while not everyone
can be an artist, everyone can be artistic.
(pp. 113–114)
This program demonstrates Reimer’s de-
scription of the purpose of the arts noted
earlier—to “make special.” Students can
experience through composing, perform-
ing, improvising, listening, and many
other activities. When we experience a
place through rhythm, melody, harmony,
and tone colors, we embody that place and
the feelings attached to it through music.
Music filters our emotional experiencing of
a place. This does not have to happen thor-
ough an international competition, either.
As Pamela Michael notes in the statement
above, “everyone can be artistic.”
Reiterating Reimer’s philosophy of
music education, the central task is to
make the experience of music available
to “all people” (2003, p. 69). This can be
through composing music about the place
in which students’ daily lives are situated
in, through performing music that reflects
the imbedded values and cultural ways of
thinking within a particular community,
or through developing an appreciation for
the variety of musical styles present in
a place through listening to music. It is
through these activities that students have
a meaningful experience of place, or as
Reimer (2003) states, “what music means,
then, is everything a person experiences
when involved in it” (p. 165).
In addition, music is increasingly
being examined as a “generative force in
human development and social bonding”
(Shelemay, 2011, p. 381; see also Anshel
& Kipper, 1988; Cross, 1999; Hannon &
Trehub, 2005; Kreutz, Bongard, Rohmann,
Hodapp, & Grebe, 2004; Patel, 2010). For
example, the activities of Public Art Workz
(Detroit, Michigan) use visual art to chal-
lenge the “deep cultural assumptions about
why Detroit suffers from poverty, racism,
and blight, and the role of violence in the
city’s problems” (Martusewicz, Edmund-
son, & Lupinacci, 2011, p. 293).
Conclusion
In this article, I have argued for a
multicultural environmental education
perspective on the role of music educa-
tion in addressing an expanding local and
global ecological crisis. In using Reimer’s
synergistic philosophy of music education
as a foundation, curriculum development
in education for sustainability can incorpo-
rate music education to address the multi-
cultural issues of the ecological crisis. Emo-
tions are being increasingly recognized as
a critical component of multicultural en-
vironmental education. It is in the context
of emotional experience that music most
authentically exists, so relying solely upon
auxiliary utilitarian justifications of music
education does not keep to the integrity
of music education as a discipline. I agree
with Reimer (2003) when he states that
“music education attempts to enhance the
effectiveness by which people are able to
extend their musical involvements” (p. 89).
Thus the inclusion and emphasis of music
education in the school curriculum chal-
lenges the false reason/emotion dichotomy.
I have also provided empirical evidence on
how the musical experience can and does
build cross-cultural understanding.
The most essential problems facing
humanity—including the maintaining
of a habitable planet for future genera-
tions—requires an interdisciplinary way
of thinking (Sternberg, 2008). Capra
(1999) has already hit the mark in stat-
ing that “the arts can be a powerful tool
for…enhancing the emotional dimension
that is increasingly being recognized as
an essential component of the learning
process” (p. 5). In doing so, however, edu-
cators must be careful not to capitalize
(pun intended) on music for purposes that
music is not most authentically suited for.
Music education could easily slip right
back into the role of the Cinderelian
stepchild of schools that music educators
have always fought against.
Notes
1 Education for sustainability is by no
means a universally understood and un-con-
tended term. Similar terms along this topic
include “schooling for sustainability” (Stone,
2010), “sustainability education” (Nolet, 2009),
“ecological literacy” (Goleman, Bennett, & Bar-
low, 2012; Orr, 1992), “environmental education”
(Stevenson, Wals, Dillon, & Brody, 2013; Turner
& Freedman, 2004), and even the provocative
“pedagogy for survival” (Cassell & Nelson, 2012).
While I am in no way attempting to argue that
these terms are synonymous, for the purpose
of this article I am choosing to use the term
education for sustainability.
2 Reimer (2003) makes a distinction be-
tween the terms emotions and feelings. Emo-
tions are a “broad level of awareness,” whereas
feelings are “the actual, specific awareness of
what is transpiring and its connection with the
details of whatever is triggering it” (p. 77). “Feel-
ing carries the generality of an emotional state
to the level at which particulars are noticed,
processed in awareness, and therefore made
conscious” (p. 211). The feeling dimension is the
subjective part of emotions—where language
ceases to adequately articulate our experiences.
It is the role of music to “refine and extend”
these emotional experiences into a more felt
awareness of our experience” (p. 81).
3 However, Reimer questions Goleman’s
(2009) treatment of emotion as a distinct intel-
Music affords students the opportunities
to place themselves into the lived experiences
of cultures distant from their own.

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
26
Sustainability Education
ligence in stating that “what is dealt with in
that book [Emotional Intelligence] is, essentially,
emotion rather than feeling. Music and the arts
are not mentioned” (Reimer, 2003, p. 212). For
a more detailed discussion of this, see Reimer
(2003, p. 211-214).
References
Allen, A. S. (2012). Ecomusicology: Music, cul-
ture, environmental studies . . . and change.
Journal of Environmental Studies and
Sciences, 2(2), 192-201. doi:10.1007/s13412-
012-0072-1
Anshel, A., & Kipper, D. (1988). The influence
of group singing on trust and cooperation.
Journal of Music Therapy, 25, 145-155
Armstrong, R. P. (1975). Wellspring: On the
myth and source of culture. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Boiger, M., & Mesquita, B. (2012). The construc-
tion of emotion in interactions, relationships,
and cultures. Emotion Review, 4(3), 221-229.
doi:10.1177/1754073912439765
Callenbach, E. (2005). Values. In M. Stone & Z.
Barlow (Eds.), Ecological literacy: Educating
our children for a sustainable world (pp. 45-
48). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Capra, F. (1999). Ecoliteracy: The challenge
for education in the next century. Liverpool
Schumacher Lectures. Berkeley, CA: Center
for Ecoliteracy.
Cassell, J. A., & Nelson, T. (2010). Visions lost
and dreams forgotten: Environmental educa-
tion, systems thinking, and possible futures
in American public schools. Teacher Educa-
tion Quarterly 37(4), 179-197.
Cassell, J. A., & Nelson, T. (2012). Pedagogy for
survival: An educational response to the
ecological crisis. In A. Wals & P. Corcoran
(Eds.), Learning for sustainability in times of
accelerating change (pp. 63 -75 ). Wag eni nge n,
The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic
Publishers.
Cole, A. G. (2007). Expanding the field: Revis-
iting environmental education principles
through multidisciplinary frameworks. The
Journal of Environmental Education, 38(2),
35-45.
Coss, R. (2013). Book review of ecoliterate:
How educators are cultivating emotional,
social, and ecological intelligence [Review
of the book Ecoliterate: How educators are
cultivating emotional, social, and ecological
intelligence by D. Goleman, L. Bennett, & Z.
Barlow]. Journal of Sustainability Educa-
tion, 5. Retrieved from http://www.jsedimen-
sions.org/wordpress/2996-2/
Cross, I. (1999). Is music the most important
thing we ever did? Music, development, and
evolution. In S. Yi (Ed.), Music, mind and sci-
ence (pp. 10-39). Seoul, Korea: Seoul National
University Press.
Edwards, A. R. (2005). The sustainability revolu-
tion: Portrait of a paradigm shift. Vancouver,
British Columbia, Canada: New Society
Publishers.
Gaughan, S. (1996). Multicultural environmen-
tal education—Making connections. PAEE
Journal, 5(1), 6-9, 26.
Goleman, D. (2009). Ecological intelligence:
How knowing the hidden impacts of what
we buy can change everything. New York:
Broadway Books.
Goleman, D., Barlow, Z., & Bennett, L. (2010).
Forging new norms in New Orleans: From
emotional to ecological intelligence. Teacher
Education Quarterly, 37(4), 87-98.
Goleman, D., Bennett, L., & Barlow, Z. (2012).
Ecoliterate: How educators are cultivating
emotional, social, and ecological intelligence.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gough, A. (2013). The emergence of environmen-
tal education research. In R. Stevenson, M.
Brody, J. Dillon, & A. Wals (Eds.), Internation-
al handbook of research on environmental
education (pp. 13-22). New York: Routledge.
Grass, R. (1994). Towards a multicultural envi-
ronmental education. Multicultural Educa-
tion, 2(4), 4-6.
Grass, R. (1995). Environmental education
and environmental justice: A three circles
perspective. Pathways to Outdoor Commu-
nication, 5(1), 9-13.
Hannon, E., & Trehub, S. (2005). Tuning in to
musical rhythms: Infants learn more read-
ily than adults. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 102(12), 639-643.
Harré, R., Armon-Jones, C., Lutz, C., & Averill,
J. ( 198 6). The social construction of emotions.
Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Jickling, B., & Wals, A. (2013). Probing norma-
tive research in environmental education:
Ideas about education and ethics. In R.
Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. Wals
(Eds.), International handbook of research
on environmental education (pp. 74-86). New
York: Routledge.
Joseph, D. (2012). Internationalising the cur-
riculum: Building intercultural understand-
ings through music. Journal of University
Teaching & Learning Practice, 9(1), 1-11.
Kreutz, G., Bongard, S., Rohmann, S., Hodapp,
V., & Grebe, D. (2004). Effects of choir sing-
ing or listening on secretory immunoglobulin
A, cortisol, and emotional state. Journal of
Behavioral Medicine, 27, 623-635.
Lewis, S., & James, K. (1995). Whose voice sets
the agenda for environmental education?
Misconceptions inhibiting racial and cultural
diversity. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 26(3), 13-21.
Liao, L., Larke, P., & Hill-Jackson, V. (2011).
Chinese papermaking: A multicultural and
environmental education strategy for pre-k
teachers. Journal of Praxis in Multicultural
Education, 6(1), 61-78. doi:10.9741/2161-
2978
Marouli, C. (2002). Multicultural environmental
education: Theory and practice. Canadian
Journal of Environmental Education, 7(1),
26-42.
Martusewicz, R. A. (2001). Seeking passage. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Martusewicz, R. A., Edmundson, J., & Lupinacci,
J. (2011). Ecojustice education: Toward
diverse, democratic, and sustainable com-
munities. New York: Routledge.
Michael, P. (2005). Helping children fall in love
with the earth: Environmental education
and the arts. In M. Stone & Z. Barlow (Eds.),
Ecological literacy: Educating our children
for a sustainable world (pp. 111-125). San
Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Nelson, T. (Ed.). (2010). Education and the envi-
ronment [Special issue]. Teacher Education
Quarterly, 37(4).
Nolet, V. (2009). Preparing sustainability-liter-
ate teachers. Teac hers C ol leg e Reco rd , 11 1(2),
409-442.
Orr, D. (1992). Ecological literacy: Education and
the transition to a postmodern world. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Orr, D. W. (2004). Earth in mind: On educa-
tion, environment, and the human prospect.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Patel, A. D. (2010). Music, biological evolution,
and the brain. In M. Bailar (Ed.), Emerging
disciplines: Shaping new fields of scholarly
inquiry beyond the humanities (pp. 41-64).
Houston, TX: Rice University Press.
Peter, K. A. (1998). Multicultural environmental
education. Green Teacher, 54, 14-18.
Ramsey, D. (2002). The role of music in envi-
ronmental education: Lessons from the cod
fishery crisis and the dust bowl days. Cana-
dian Journal of Environmental Education,
7(1), 183-198.
Reimer, B. (2003). A philosophy of music educa-
tion: Advancing the vision (3rd ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning
to be creative (2nd ed.). West Sussex, UK:
Capstone Publishing.
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson,
Å., Stuart III Chapin, F. F., Lambin, E., &
Falkenmark, M. (2009). Planetary boundar-
ies: Exploring the safe operating space for
humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2), 1-33.
Shelemay, K. K. (2011). Musical communities:
Rethinking the collective in music. Journal
of the American Musicological Society, 64(2),
349-390.
Sinha, S. (2010). The pedagogical value of
discomforting emotions within the multi-
cultural classroom. International Journal
of Learning, 17(8), 105-114.
Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Con-
necting classrooms & communities. Great
Barrington, MA: The Orion Society.
Steffen, W., Persson, Å., Deutsch, L., Zalasiewicz,
J., Williams, M., Richardson, K., & Svedin,
U. (2011). The anthropocene: From global
change to planetary stewardship. AMBIO: A
Journal of the Human Environment, 40(7),
739-761. doi:10.1007/s13280-011-0185-x
Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Interdisciplinary prob-
lem-based learning: An alternative to tradi-
tional majors and minors. Liberal Education,
94(1), 12-17.
Stevenson, R., Wals, A., Dillon, J., Brody, M.
(2013). Introduction. In R. Stevenson, M. Bro-
dy, J. Dillon, & A. Wals (Eds.), International
handbook of research on environmental edu-
cation (pp. 1-12. New York: Routledge.
Stone, M. K., & Barlow, Z. (Eds.). (2005). Eco-
logical literacy: Educating our children for
a sustainable world. San Francisco: Sierra
Club Books.

FALL 2013
27
A Multicultural Interdisciplinary Inquiry
Stone, M. K. (2010). A schooling for sustainabil-
ity framework. Tea che r Ed uc ati on Quart er ly,
37(4), 33-46.
Turner, K., & Freedman, B. (2004). Music and
environmental studies. The Journal of Envi-
ronmental Education, 36(1), 45-52.
Wang, H. (2008). “Red eyes”: Engaging emotions
in multicultural education. Multicultural
Perspectives, 10(1),10-16. doi:10.1080/1521
0960701869330
Zeyer, A., & Kelsey, E. (2013). Environmen-
tal education in a cultural context. In R.
Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. Wals
(Eds.), International handbook of research
on environmental education (pp. 206-212).
New York: Routledge.