Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 1
Theoretical and methodological reflection of a case study on
the Deblínsko landscape project
Alois Hynek, Břetislav Svozil, Jakub Trojan, Jan Trávníček
Envigogika 10 (2) – Reviewed Papers/ Recenzované články
Publikováno/Published dne 25. 4. 2015
DOI: 10.14712/18023061.477
Abstract:
The case study is based primarily on long-standing collaboration of two public sector
institutions: the MU in Brno and the Deblín Primary School and Kindergarten, with
cooperation of experts in numerous other institutions. The MU in Brno and the Deblín
Primary School and Kindergarten focus on research, teaching and, above all, practical
applications of sustainability/security. The objective of the study is to revise the theoretical
and methodological frameworks influencing approaches to teaching sustainability in
primary education and, through it, to open a discussion of civic society topics and
formation starting at the level of children/pupils/students. The vehicle for achieving the
objective is a thorough critical view of the “Deblínsko landscape project”. The authors’
experience concerns development of dialogue between the world of science and its
applications and needs of those on whom its consequences impact. They are collected as
part of activities aimed primarily at intensive field and project teaching, which reflects the
sustainability discourse in the primary, secondary and tertiary education practice and is
also connected with establishment of international collaboration. The focus of the field
work is based on the understanding of each of the institutions as regional education
centres (Deblín Primary School and Kindergarten = community centre), focused on solving
issues of sustainability, involving owners, users, decision-makers, shareholders and
stakeholders within public territorial administration, represented by means of goals and
measures of regional development schemes along with micro-regional development
programmes and local action group (LAG) activities.
Key words:
primary school; regional university; local community; participatory action research; rural
sustainability
Abstrakt:
Případová studie vychází primárně z mnohaleté spolupráce dvou institucí veřejného
sektoru – MU Brno a ZŠ a MŠ Deblín, které se zaměřují na výzkum, výuku a především
praktické aplikace trvalé udržitelnosti/bezpečnosti. Cílem studie bylo a je otevřít diskurz
nad tématy, vytvářet občanskou společnost od úrovně dětí/žáků/studentů při schopnosti
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
2 Envigogika 10 (2)
umět odhalit nedostatky uplatněním transdisciplinárního přístupu ve studiu krajinných
ekosystémů.
Naše zkušenosti směřují k rozvíjení dialogu mezi světem vědy a jejích aplikací s potřebami
těch, na něž její důsledky dopadají. Děje se tak v rámci aktivit směřovaných především k
intenzivní terénní a projektové výuce, včleněním do diskurzu trvalé udržitelnosti v praxi
ZŠ, SŠ a VŠ s navázáním mezinárodní spolupráce. Zaměření terénní práce vychází z
chápání jednotlivých pracovišť jako regionálních center vzdělanosti (ZŠ a MŠ Deblín =
komunitní centrum), která se zaměřují především k řešení témat trvalé udržitelnosti
zahrnujících vlastníky, uživatele, rozhodovatelé, podílníky a dotčené v rámci veřejné
správy území reprezentované prostřednictvím cílů a opatření krajských programů
regionálního rozvoje s programy rozvoje mikroregionů a činností místních akčních skupin
(MAS).
Klíčová slova:
základní škola; regionální univerzita; místní komunita; participativní akční výzkum;
udržitelný rozvoj venkova
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 3
Introduction
The present study is the outcome of collaborative work on development of study
materials concerned with education for sustainability. The section on methods describes
the theoretical frameworks of the project, chiefly the chosen approaches to participatory
action research, the importance of revised taxonomies of educational goals, and
translation of the dispositif concept into a matrix for sustainability educational themes. One
of the preconditions of functionality of the approach is the recognition of pupils as engaged
citizens of the community, as described in the conclusion of chapter 2. Following a brief
summary of results (chapter 3) is a discussion of the specific impacts of the
methodological development on teaching at the MU Department of Geography and the
Deblín project as such. The study structure thus reflects the main objective of the paper,
which is to revise the theoretical and methodological concepts informing innovations in
approaches to sustainability education in primary schools in order to open a critical
discussion of civic society issues. The core of the study is based on a transcription of
significant outcomes of the Deblínsko landscape project, used as a best practice example
in environmental education.
Historic context of developing approaches to sustainability
teaching
Thanks to its interdisciplinary focus, interest in landscape issues in all their spatial
contexts, and emphasis on a dynamic view of natural and social phenomena, the discipline
of geography is highly suited for handling practical issues of sustainable development. In
the Czech setting, its relationship with environmental issues has been forming for many
years, with certain difficulties and shifts in understanding of both the environment and the
role of geographic research within it.
The first seminar on a geographic approach to the environment was held at the
Department of Geography of the Faculty of Science of then J.E. Purkyně University (UJEP,
present-day Department of Geography of the Faculty of Science of Masaryk University) in
September 1973. The reason was an effort to keep up with the international development
in delicate questions of its deteriorating quality. The ‘environment’ topic was very difficult
to promote in then Czechoslovakia, under the conditions of an extensive ‘command
economy’, but there were individual environmentalists as well as groups who managed to
defend their position versus the political regime. Along with the satellites of the Soviet
Union, the Czechoslovak government refused to participate at the global conference on
human environment in Stockholm in 1972 as a consequence of the German Democratic
Republic not having been invited. Even back then, the geographic institute of the UJEP
knew about an important document of the US government: The 1969 National
Environmental Policy Act – an act of law on establishing a national environmental policy
aiming at setting up an Environmental Quality Board. Opening the ‘environment’ topic
internationally was a fundamental challenge in studying the issues in geography,
particularly by implementing landscape studies as a study of a set of landscape
ecosystems.
Another impetus for environmental studies at then Department of Geography of the
Faculty of Science of then J.E. Purkyně University in Brno (UJEP, original and present-day
Masaryk University) was the activity of the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of
Nature), in which Professor V. Vaníček of Mendel University in Brno was actively involved;
he was recognised for his activities at the European level later on, after November 1989.
He collaborated with the UJEP Geography Department on developing a strategy for the
development of the Fryšávka basin (Hynek et al., 1985). The strategy was based on the
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
4 Envigogika 10 (2)
important World Conservation Strategy (1980), published by the IUCN. It contained the
first mention of the ‘sustainable development’ concept, followed in 1987 by Our Common
Future, also known as the Brundtland Report, and more precisely as the Report of the
World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future.
It would be naïve to think that November 1989 meant a total reversal in the Czech
society’s attitude to environmental issues. Some conservatively and liberally oriented
politicians have questioned (chiefly in the media) the ‘sustainability’ concept and preferred
revenues at the expense of environmental degradation. In contrast to that, Kates, Parris
and Leiserowitz (2005) consider the ‘environment’ topic as important as peace, freedom
and development. It is the regard for future generations that has the ability to make
development sustainable, which contrasts with attitudes that see nature as a source
without limits to its exploitation.
Nevertheless, the application of the sustainability concept in our education and
research is fundamentally influenced by the set of documents Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment from 2003 (Alcamo J. et al. 2003), the development of which involved the
Czech Professor B. Moldan, Director of the Charles University Environment Centre in
Prague.
Innovation of the IUCN’s efforts for sustainability consists in the conclusions of a
consultation formulated by Adams (2006), chiefly the solution to the duality of the
necessary long-term structural changes and short-term interests of the poor, supported
with locked markets, financial institutions, shareholders and politicians. This also concerns
the relationship between sustainability and the Millennium Development Goals, which
ought to be in consonance (see Grigga et al., 2013). We can refer to the significant shift in
seeking paths towards sustainability as to the Rio (de Janeiro) Process – commenced with
the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development – Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED). So far the latest sequel to this process was the Earth Summit
Rio+20 in 2012, the outcomes of which the UNEP interpreted in Our Planet with the paper
From Outcome to Implementation. An overview of the succession of international
conferences dealing with education for environmental sustainability is provided by, e.g.
Wright (2002).
However, application of new approaches and concepts of sustainability as they have
been forming progressively in the international and Czech (professional) community, and
have impacted on sustainability practice as well, has always depended on the ability to
elaborate them for specific conditions and context. Such efforts are mostly initiated by
bottom-up activity and take place with the involvement of various stakeholders, such as
the long-term effort of teachers and students of Masaryk University in Brno for
collaboration with citizens (pupils, teachers, local authorities) at the local level described
below. The collaboration project has already been described in related papers (Hynek et
al., 2009, 2010, 2011); here, we primarily specify the main starting points and potential
for implementation of other similar collaboration projects between a university and a local
community, mediated by the primary school in the given area.
Methods
The model Deblínsko project includes an academic component (represented by
research, which plays a cognitive as well as a metacognitive role), an educational
component (at several levels: education for Masaryk University students, pupils at the
local school, as well as “social learning” taking place among all those involved; see the
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 5
conclusion), and finally, a practical component (involving the launch of processes relating
to development of the municipality or its cultural, natural, etc. resources). Each of these
components is based on different points of departure, which we will briefly outline in this
overview.
In the research section, we work with the true meaning of participatory action
research, which is used for studying people’s material conditions - incomes, housing,
environment, jobs, healthcare. The point is not only acquisition of information but above
all its application; not proving of hypotheses but building and empowering of communities,
mutual understanding, deepening of relationships and enforcement of changes. Within it,
we carry out communities surveys, one-to-one interviews, group discussions, we
participate in social/cultural events, listen to stories, historic memories, and investigate
people’s biographies just as we do statistics. This concept is followed by action research.
Fig. 1: Participatory action research, Chevalier and Buckles, 2013, p. 10
Berg (2004:196) understands action research as a practical strategy for managing
social research requiring systematic, organised and premeditated investigation. Its
practical impacts are no less important: adoption of the principles of participation,
deliberation, empowerment and emancipation of people interested in improving their
situation, the social conditions of their lives. Action research includes:
 A highly rigorous, yet premeditated or interpretative approach to empiric research.
 Integration of some practical outcomes relating to real lives of participants in the
research project.
 A spiral of steps, each consisting of a certain type of planning, action and
evaluation.
 Democratisation of knowledge production and application.
 Ethical fairness in benefits arising from the knowledge of the generation process.
 An ecological attitude to society and nature.
 Evaluation of human abilities of learning, change and deliberation.
 A commitment to non-violent social change.
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
6 Envigogika 10 (2)
According to Berg (2004), participants/stakeholders in such research include, for
instance, representative samples of the public (respondent groups), representatives of
institutions (participants of fora within groups) and informal meetings or other meetings at
various levels (municipal meetings). R. Kohoutek (2015) provides an apt definition of
action research in social sciences: it is focused on cognition, evaluation and improvement
of practice, e.g., educational, which is our case.
In the educational section, the guidance of university students at the Department of
Geography of the MU Faculty of Science in the subjects of Sustainability and Urban and
Rural Studies is based on adopting the ‘educational objectives’, which was first classified in
a recognised way by Bloom et al. (1956). According to Vávra (in Hynek, Vávra, 2012, pp.
111-112), a revision of the taxonomy was made by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001).
Consequently, it has two main dimensions/domains: the domain of knowledge and that of
cognitive processes. As for knowledge, the authors include in it factual knowledge,
conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and what has been underestimated so far in
the Czech educational system, metacognitive knowledge ). Anderson and Krathwohl
(2001), and after all, even Marzano and Kendall (2006) thus abridge Bloom’s taxonomy by
adding the metacognitive levels including critical thinking and even identification with
motivation – the process of awareness, application of information, own thinking, and
implementation. Nilsson (2012) also adds the taxonomy used in the PISA – Programme for
International Student Assessment, which newly puts an emphasis on information and
communication technologies as well. Our geographic education practice also follows,
among other things, the US national geographic standards (Heffron and Downs, 2012).
The effort of Vávra (2011), involving his own interpretation of educational taxonomic
objectives, has been promoted in the Czech geographic education system. Hynek and
Vávra (2012) provide a deeper perspective of the geographic education.
Table 1: Taxonomies of educational objectives (Nilsson, 2012)
Bloom (1956) Anderson &
Krathwohl (2001)
Marzano & Kendall
(2006)
PISA (2000)
Evaluation Create Self-System Thinking Communicate
Synthesis Evaluate Metacognition Construct
Analysis Analyze Knowledge Utilization Evaluate
Application Apply Analysis Integrate
Comprehension Understand Comprehension Manage
Knowledge Remember Retrieval Access
The key context for the Deblínsko project is the setting of the field teaching/research
practice. The current overview of the applied ‘sustainability’ concept in the field practice is
shown in the table below, inspired by the “dispositif concept” according to Foucault (1999,
2000, pp. 374-5) as commented on by Deleuze (2003). It consists in combination of
discursive and non-discursive practices that relate to the topic. The “dispositive”
corresponds to institutional, physical and administrative mechanisms along with knowledge
structures that reinforce and maintain governance. The following matrix (Table 2) for
sustainability teaching, which would call for a separate paper by itself, represents the
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 7
maximum extent of sustainability teaching guidance, from which required operations are
always selected; nevertheless, the overall framework gives a true picture of the
targetedness of the educational content in reference to the educational objectives specified
above.
Table 2: Matrix for decoding rural sustainability in Foucault’s “dispositive” mode (Hynek,
2013)
Step Identification A B C D
1 Natural landscape
ecosystems
Ecosystem services Supply
Stock/resources
Geography
Geo-informatics/
GIS
Knowledge of local
environment
Cognition
2 Land use
Landscape cover
Use
procedures/regimes
Technology
changes
Stock/exploited
stock
Harvest
Yield
Local use
Local food
Consumption
Imports
Exports
3 Cultural landscape
ecosystems
Productive
Protected
Bearing capacity Added nutrients
and energies
Endangerment/
degradation
Disasters/threats
4 Landscape gaze,
Environment
Perception of place
Power and
resistance
Perception
Imagination/
imagery
Representation
Spatial policy
Mental maps
Biographies
Stories
Landscape
Design
Heritage
Inertia/
changes
Environmental
footprint
5 Landscape policy
Participants and
implementers
Wellbeing
requirements
Transparency
Owners
Tenants
Shareholders
Stakeholders
Decision-makers
Planners
Experts
Companies
Implementers Political ecology
Local/
regional planning
Ecological diversity
Recreation
Spatiality
6 Local production
Savings
Incomes/livelihood
Production factors,
Entrepreneurs
Market
Internal income
External income
Internal and
external inputs
Labour market
Outputs –
goods and services
Social income
Production
Distribution
Exchange
Consumption
Permanent economy
7 Imported natural
capital
Technical
infrastructure
Material and energy
flows
Transport network
Resources
Origin
Water
management
Energy network
Waste
management
Consumption
costs/revenues
Communication
Information and
communication
technologies
8 Communities
Municipalities
Housing
House owners
Natural
demographic
change
Migration
Mobility
Cooperation and
conflicts
Institutions
9 Social services Education Health Administration Financial, legal,
remedial, etc.
10 Visitors (Eco)tourism
(Eco)sports
Second homes Chalets/cottages Other activities
11 Culture Lifestyle Public space
Sacral spots
Cultural production
Organisations
Municipal plan
Improvement
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
8 Envigogika 10 (2)
Management
12 Sustainability
Security/safety
Coherence
Values
Changes
Responses
Social learning
Legislation
Agenda 21
Local action groups/
LEADER
Public hearings,
debates and
discussions
Government
Programmes
Projects
Actions
Scenarios
Renaturalisation
Restoration
Households/
municipalities as
ecosystems
Regulation
Managerial forces
To explain how the educational component is connected with the practical one in the
functional model of the Deblínsko project, we will use Epstein (2009), who works with two
theoretical models. In the external model (see Fig. 2), he emphasises groups that act upon
the child/pupil: the family, school and community. In our case, the primary school is
supported by the university, which is also involved in communication with the Deblín
community: we have carried out several meetings with citizens, who included a number of
parents, so that Epstein’s model can be implemented in practice. Moreover, the
university’s academicians have been invited by the primary school teachers directly to
teach along with the university students. This involved primarily field sustainability
teaching, which requires deeper knowledge. The university students led teaching in
information and communication technologies at the primary school as well, such as
deployment of geographical information systems in studying local sustainability.
Awareness and working with the finding that each group brings into the mutual
interactions experience, philosophical framework and activities that create them is the
precondition for cooperation. Experts coming from outside the area are well capable of
accentuating this model in particular. In our case, this is the Masaryk University institute
above all.
Fig. 2: External model according to Epstein (2009)
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 9
The internal model (see Fig. 3) works primarily with interactions between the family
and school. Here, B. Svozil’s role and its transformation (teacher – headmaster) was
important, along with a certain associated degree of power or influence on involvement, as
well as establishment of community processes.
Fig. 3: Internal model according to Epstein (2009).
Key inter-institutional interactions (in overlapping areas):
F = Family; C = Child; S = School; P = Parent; T = Teacher.
Interactions include those at the institutional level and at the individual level.
The outcome of application of this model is, as stated by Davis (2010) in ÄrlemalmHagser
(2013), that the children are now recognised as able, strong-willed and active
individuals, citizens with the right to be involved and be heard in matters that concern
them.
Results and discussion
The revision of the theoretical and methodological approaches reflects the activities
of a stakeholder team, based on the following assumptions:
 transformation of roles from observer to participation in community processes;
 site survey and understanding – must be based on detailed knowledge of the
site/community and correct interpretation of community processes;
 children/pupils are the means of starting community transformations;
 the research is long-term.
These activities have succeeded in stimulating the development of pupils towards
the role of conscious and responsible citizens who understand the needs of their
surroundings and show an effort to be involved in their future development. The pupils’
activity has helped provoke the local inhabitants’ interest in the surroundings of their
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
10 Envigogika 10 (2)
homes, develop their sensitivity towards sustainability principles, and motivated them for
active involvement in the project. For pupils and students alike, the project is an
exceptional opportunity to participate in outcomes that are progressively presented and
discussed with representatives of public administration and local self-governance with the
aim to reflect or implement them in practice.
The research component has evolved along with the local activities. A. Hynek and B.
Svozil empowered the social research in both the subjects by deployment of qualitative
and ethnographic methods, which have now both been adapted into the participatory
action research. The book by Cloke et al. (2004) turned out to be methodologically
important, as it deals with not only structure of geographic data in its first part, but a
brand new method of interpretation of geographic data in the second part. It is this second
part that brings an emphasis on geographic thinking meeting the requirement for
developing Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives mentioned above as done by
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) as well as Marzano and Kendall (2006) at the
metacognitive level.
A new education and research team, led by A. Hynek, was set up in 2008 with
students of doctoral programmes of B. Svozil, J. Trávníček and J. Trojan. The decisive
impulse came with B. Svozil’s becoming a teacher at the Deblín Primary School, and its
headmaster later on. Based on the revised theoretical and methodological concepts
mentioned above, A. Hynek and B. Svozil reworked the educational objectives of the
subjects Z0131 Sustainability and Z0132 Urban and Rural Studies, taught at the Masaryk
University Department of Geography, while J. Trávníček and J. Trojan integrated advanced
geoinformation methods into the two subjects. Results of work of students, who have
appreciated the connection of the field studies with the GIS technology application, have
been regularly published since then. The university students have thus entered an area in
which B. Svozil has oriented geography education towards sustainability, and had no
difficulty communicating with the primary school pupils, who knew the Deblín area
differently from them. This resulted in an interdigitation of the university students’
expertise and external “unbiased” view with the internal knowledge and sensitive
perception of Deblín Primary School pupils as local experts. An important project
component was the development of two local textbooks (Svozil and Hynek, 2011, 2012)
and the Deblínsko Atlas (Trávníček and Trojan, 2011), a series of articles published
domestically and abroad, and most importantly, implementation of project
teaching/learning at both the Primary School and the MU Department of Geography, which
complies with the educational objectives of Bloom, Anderson/Krathwohl and
Marzano/Kendall. This is a turn towards critical and creative thinking, sensorimotor activity
and effective formative education. Dlouhá (2002) brought important inspiration by
formulating this type of pedagogy, with which we have affiliated and added our own
sustainability curriculum.
Conclusion
The cooperation of a university with a rural primary school is not usual:
academicians perceive themselves as too high up, and rural schools as too low down. Yet,
the sustainability theme is a potential keystone of their cooperation: academicians are not
as masterful in the rural terrain as they are in the city, and country people often know
their environment with remarkable precision. The municipality has launched a type of
governance (see above) that has meant a rise in the social life and practical politics. The
cooperation has given rise to a new concept of the Deblín school, which now uses the
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 11
motto “Sustainable learning school”. We understand this learning school so that the
educational process is not along the lines of one-way teacher-pupil communication, but
also pupil-teacher, pupil-teacher-parent, teacher-community, etc. The increasing number
of combinations ultimately means that everyone is a pupil. The learning school can also be
interpreted as constantly evolving teachers = constantly evolving school (spiral model). If
the practice succeeds in fulfilling this, the school also becomes a place of innovation. In
this context, the accent on personal sustainability is important: how much and what we
say is not as important as what we do and how. If we want to pass these principles down,
teaching them is not enough: we should live according to them, which is the point of the
personal approach.
The primary school has begun to change its established ways (routine activities)
towards an open school, and community (social and cultural) centre in a sense. The school
has become a part of functioning networks – either it creates networks or participates in
them. In a sense, it can be referred to as a globalisation product, combining global
influences on the municipality and their adaption based on local natural and social
capacities. The school thus no longer plays only the conventional educational role, but also
the role of a cementing element; it unites the community, or at least tries to invite it to do
so. This change makes room for new actors and their actions, which lead to new
discourses that enhance, even with non-discursive practices, the promotion of
sustainability in the place’s community life. Ultimately, therefore, the changes are
contributing to increasing the school’s prestige, community status, but on the other hand,
this is associated with greater interlinkage with the municipal administration. With an
appropriate clear setting and respecting of positions, this can be beneficial for
sustainability. Naturally, this approach raises the requirements on all those involved.
Acknowledgement
Development of the former version of the case study has been supported from the
project OP VK CZ.1.07/2.4.00/17.0130 “Interdisciplinary Network for Policy Development
in Sustainable Development Field” funded through the Education for Competitiveness
Operational Programme via the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport –
http://mosur.czp.cuni.cz.
References
 Adams, W. (2006). The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and
Development in the Twenty-first Century. Report of the IUCN Renowned Thinkers
Meeting. United Kingdom: IUCN. Available from:
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_future_of_sustainability .
 Alcamo J. et al. (2003). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – Ecosystems and
Human Well-being – A Frame for Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being.
A Report of the Conceptual Framework Working Group of the Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
 Alcamo, J. et al. (2003a). Ekosystémy a kvalita lidského života: Rámec pro
hodnocení. Zpráva pracovní skupiny pro koncepční rámec Ekosystémového
hodnocení milénia. Praha: Ministerstvo životního prostředí
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
12 Envigogika 10 (2)
 Anderson L. and Krathwohl D. A. (2001). Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and
Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York,
NY: Longman.
 Ärlemalm-Hagser E. (2013). Respect for nature - a prescription for developing
environmental awareness in preschool. CEPS Journal 3 (1), 25-44.
 Le Blanc, D., Roehri, R. A. (2012). Back to Our Common Future Sustainable
Development in the 21st century (SD21) project Summary for policymakers.
Available from: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/UN-
DESA_Back_Common_Future_En.pdf.
 Berg, B. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social science (5th ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
 Bloom, B. ed. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of
educational goals; Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York, NY: Longmans,
Green.
 Chevalier J.M., Buckles D.J. (2013). Participatory Action Research: Theory and
Methods for Engaged Inquiry. London: Routledge UK.
 Cloke P., Cook I., Crang P., Goodwin M., Painter J., Philo C. (2004). Practising
Human Geography. London: Sage Publications.
 Davis J. (2008). What might education for sustainability look like in early
childhood?. The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society.
Paris: UNESCO Publications.
 Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. (1972).
Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. Stockholm.
Available from:
http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.Print.asp?documentID=97
and ArticleID=1503.
 Deleuze G. (2003). Foucault. Praha: Herrmann and synové.
 Dlouhá J., ed. (2002). Inovace vysokoškolské výuky v environmentálních oborech.
Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Centrum pro otázky životního prostředí.
 Duncan A. (2012). New Taxonomy of Education Objectives – Marzano and Kendall,
2007, slide 3. Available from:
 http://www.slideshare.net/Amberagd/new-taxonomy-of-educational-objectives
 Foucault, M. (1999). Dějiny sexuality 1, Vůle k vědění. Praha: Herrmann and
synové
 Foucault, M. (2000). Dohlížet a trestat. Praha: Dauphin.
 From Outcome to Implementation. (2013). Our Planet. Nairobi: UNEP. Available
from: http://www.unep.org/pdf/OP-FEB-EN-2013.pdf.
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 13
 Fugueiredo L., Amorim L. (2007). Decoding the urban grid: or why cities are
neither trees nor perfect grids. Proceedings, 6th
International Space Syntax
Symposium. Istanbul, 2006.
 Griggs D., et al (2013). Sustainable development goals for people and planet.
Nature, vol. 405, pp. 305-307. Available from:
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/844naturesjournal.pdf.
 Heffron S., Downs R. (2012). Geography for Life: National Geography Standards,
2nd ed. Geography Education National Implementation Project. Washington, D.C.:
National Council for Geographical Education.
 Hynek, A. et al. (1985): The Fryšávka drainage basin strategy as proposed by
geographical workshop group of Brno university. Scripta Fac. Sci. Nat. Univ. Purk.
Brun., Geographia 15, 139–157.
 Hynek, A., Svozil, B., Trávníček, J., and Trojan, J. (2009). Trvalá udržitelnost
Deblínska: Vzdělávací projekt. Envigogika, 4(2). Available from
http://envigogika.cuni.cz/index.php/Envigogika/article/view/40 DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.14712/18023061.40
 Hynek A., Svozil B., Vágai T., Trávníček J., Trojan J. (2010): Sustainability in
Practice. In: A.Barton, J.Douhá, eds.: Multi-Actor Learning for Sustainable Regional
Development in Europe: A Handbook of Best Practice. Grosvenor House Publishing
Limited, Guildford. 343 pp., pp. 215-233.
 Hynek, A., Svozil, B., Trávníček, J., and Trojan, J. (2011). Best Practice Example of
Educational Project: Sustainability in Deblín, South Moravia, Czech Republic. In: A.
Demirci, L. Chalmers, Y. Ari, J. Lidstone, eds.: Building Bridges between Cultures
through Geographical Education - Proceedings of the IGU-CGE Istanbul
Symposium: July 8-10, 2010, IGU Commission on Geographical Education, Fatih
University. 307 pp., pp. 23-30.
 Hynek, A., Svozil, B., Vagai, T., Trávníček, J., and Trojan, J. (2011). D.
Sustainability in Practice. Multi-Actor Learning, 215.
 Hynek A., Vávra J. (2012). Dešifrovací klíč k současným geografiím. Available
from: http://www.kge.tul.cz/attachments/article/327/Desifrak.pdf.
 Hynek A. (2013). Deblínsko ve výuce trvalé udržitelnosti. In: Diviaková, A. (ed.),
2013: Vybrané aspekty integrovaného manažmentu životného prostredia. Zborník
vedeckých príspevkov z konferencie konanej 12. septembra 2013 vo Zvolene,
Katedra UNESCO pre ekologické vedomie a TUR, FEE TU vo Zvolene, 234 pp., pp.
179-191
 Kates, R., Thomas M. Parris, and Anthony A. Leiserowitz. (2005). What is
sustainable development? Environment 47(3). 9-21.
 Kohoutek R. (2015). Akční výzkum. Available from: http://slovnik-cizich
slov.abz.cz/web.php/slovo/akcni-vyzkum
 Marzano, R.J. and J.S. Kendall, eds. (2007). The New Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press. Available from:
http://thekglawyerblog.com/ptblog/articles/from-bloom-to-marzano-a-new-
taxonomy-of-educational-objectives-for-plt/.
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
14 Envigogika 10 (2)
 Millennium Development Goals. (2000). Available from:
http://www.alliance2015.org/fileadmin/user_upload/MDGs.pdf.
 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being:
Synthesis. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
 The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Pub. L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-
4347, January 1, 1970, as amended by Pub. L. 94-52, July 3, 1975, Pub. L. 94-83,
August 9, 1975, and Pub. L. 97-258, § 4(b), Sept. 13, 1982. Available from:
http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm.
 Nilsson P. (2012). Sense and Sensation. Writing on Creativity, Education,
Philosophy, and Cognitive Science. Available from:
http://www.senseandsensation.com/2012/03/taxonomies-of-six-educational.html.
 Pol, M., Hloušková, L., Lazarová, B., Novotný, P., Sedláček, M. (2013). Když se
školy učí. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common
Future. (1987). New York, NY: United Nations World Commission on Environment
and Development. A/42/427.
 Le Blanc, D., Liu, W., O´Connor, D., Zubcevic I. (2012). Rio+20 working papers
Issue 1: Development cooperation in the light of sustainable development and the
SDGs: Preliminary exploration of the issues Division for Sustainable Development,
UNDESA. UN Division for Sustainable Development. Available from:
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/761workingpaper3.pdf.
 Svozil, B., Hynek, A. (2011). Deblínsko: na cestě k trvalé udržitelnosti. Deblín.
(ESF, MŠMT): ZŠ a MŠ Deblín.
 Svozil, B., Hynek, A. (2012). Dvojjazyčná učebnice terénního učení – Deblín a
okolí. Czech-English Textbook of Outdoor Learning: Deblín and its Surroundings.
Deblín. (ESF, MŠMT): ZŠ a MŠ Deblín.
 Trojan, J., Trávníček, J. (2011): Atlas Deblínska. Brno: Geodis.
 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Rio de Janerio,
Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. AGENDA 21. Available from:
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf.
 Vávra, J. (2011). Proč a k čemu taxonomie vzdělávacích cílů. Available from:
clanky.rvp.cz/clanek/o/z/11113/PROC-A-K-CEMU-TAXONOMIE-VZDELAVACICH-
CILU.html.
 World Conservation Strategy, Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable
Development. (1980). IUCN-UNEP-WWF, Gland.
 Wright, T. (2002). Definitions and frameworks for environmental sustainability in
higher education. Higher Education Policy 15. 105–120. Amsterdam: Elsevier, Int.
Assoc. of Universities.
Alois Hynek – Department of Geography, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University,
Brno
Envigogika: Charles University E-journal for Environmental Education ISSN 1802-3061
http://www.envigogika.cuni.cz/ 15
Břetislav Svozil – Headmaster’s Office of Deblín Primary School and Kindergarten
Jakub Trojan – Institute of Geonics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech
Republic, v.v.i.
Jan Trávníček – The Nottingham Trent University, U.K.