Making Room for Place-Based Knowledge in Rural Classrooms*

* Funded by the following: An American Fellowship from the American Association University Women, Stanford Center on Adolescence Youth Purpose Research Award supported by the John Templeton Foundation and the Thrive Foundation for Youth, and the Sustainable Rural Communities Initiative at Oregon State University. For many rural schools the view outside the classroom window is one of scenic fields, pasture lands, or forests nestled at the base of mountains. Despite the proximity of rural schools to both agricultural land and the natural world, what little connection to place that may have existed in rural schools' curricula has been disappearing as schools shift their focus toward basic academic skills (e.g., reading, math, and writing) (Sobel, 2005; Theobald, 1997). We argue that ultimately the trend in reduction of school programs and the practice of undervaluing place-based-knowledge, especially place-based knowledge gained outside the classroom through interactions within place, diminishes the ability of schools to be the primary location for collective socialization and the transmission of local community values to youth. We assert as well that consequences for both the quality of education and opportunities offered for youth and the overall community well-being ensue. Place-Based Knowledge The smallness and safety of rural communities promotes the development of place-based knowledge among the youth. Many youth who live in rural places have intimate knowledge of their communities and the surrounding areas both in terms of the natural landscapes, local culture, and values. They spend time in and out of town with the natural settings of their community as the backdrop to their lives (Brown, 2007; Childress 2000). They gain their knowledge of place through their own explorations - and by interacting with community members and the land through agricultural work, recreation, and outdoorsmanship. Benefits for Youth: Youth benefit from developing placebased knowledge and engaging with place in multiple ways in both psychological and social realms of development. While urban and suburban youth generally lack a strong connection with nature and natural spaces (Brown, 2007; Louv, 2006) many rural youth remain actively engaged in nature. While working with youth in Eastern Oregon, I had the opportunity to learn about the meanings youth give to nature and the natural spaces that surround them. On one particular occasion, a young woman drove me to a spot she knew that affords a spectacular view of the local mountain range. We parked, and she explained to me which mountain was which, adding details about which she had climbed and with whom, and how the world looks from the top. On a second occasion, a young man borrowed his dad's truck so he could show me some places well beyond town. He navigated numerous unmarked roads, pointing out upcoming vistas and fields in which he had worked always noting where we were in relation to town-demonstrating his mastery of the local geography despite the absence of street signs or other conventional markers. Another pair of students showed me the spaces they had named and thus claimed as their own. As we walked over bridges that crossed creeks, and through groves of trees they showed me-natural spaces that were technically in town, but places in which they could surround themselves with nature and quiet within a short walk from their homes. Their favorite is a spot by a creek they call the "new bookstore." Evidence supports the notion that when youth regularly interact with nature, they are buffered from stress (Wells & Evans, 2003). Socially, rural youth tend to have multiple connections to other community members across generations. As students led me around their communities they pointed out the homes of teachers, the nurse who was at their birth, and fields where they had worked. Students were frequently greeted by waves or car horns as they were recognized by peers and older community members. …