Liisa Horelli and Marketta Kyttä gave a short presentation of their course on virtual teaching of environmental psychology, at the Helsinki University of Technology. It is a special course (6 ects) comprising 19 lectures with power points and small texts as well as news and discussion groups, practical rehearsals and an exam. The running of the course requires about 40 hours work from the teacher and 100 hours from the webmaster-tutor (see attachment). Melanie Jaeger illustrated the structure and content of undergraduate teaching at the University of Magdeburg, Germany, in which out of 18 modules five can be chosen in environmental psychology (two lectures, two seminars and one applied project module). A masters course in environmental psychology will be implemented which will have five modules. It has been constructed in collaboration with the University of Surrey. Marino Bonaiuto told about the plans for a European level master in EP which would be synchronised with the new European educational structures. Aleya Abdel-Hadi claimed that the University of Alexandria does not have courses in EP, but there was an interest in the creation of a masters course.

Only few of the participants had had experience of e-learning methods, although several had experience of distance-learning. University of Barcelona has some teaching material in the web, but there were no representatives from that University. Suggestions were also made for alternative methods, such as slides on the internet and video conferencing.

Several participants emphasized the importance of shared courses and a certain willingness emerged to create a pool of shared teaching material, for instance on history, theory and methodology. This would further highlight the transnational and transdisciplinary approach of environmental psychology. In addition, it was stressed that such courses should not only be aimed at EU -members but also at those from non-EU countries.

The participants represented different fields, such as psychology, education, architecture and planning, technology etc. A quick survey disclosed that the themes that the participants could provide power point series or lectures in digital form are: general and architectural psychology, psychology of sustainability, Gibson´s ecological psychology, attitudes (towards sustainable development), social representations and cognition, perceptions (of nature) and culture, modern society, urban landscape, natural and social environments, environmental quality, privacy and crowding, environmental engineering, human technique interaction, behaviour and design, environmental analysis, influence upon the environment, participatory processes in planning, children (and the city, urban space, outdoor environment independent mobility, road safety, health and physical activity), methodology (behaviour mapping), internet techniques, contributions to developing countries, residential environments.

Environmental psychology – a fuzzy term!

Despite the interdisciplinary nature, environmental psychology is not fully recognized within different disciplines, nor is it regarded as an independent discipline. The participants felt that the term environmental psychology does not properly represent its true character. One suggestion was to label courses in environmental psychology as “environment behaviour (design) research” or as “Environment – Behaviour – Society”, like Gary Moore has done at the University of Sydney (www.arch.usyd.edu.au/web/reserach/ebr.html ).

The rejected COST –proposal

Last May a joint effort was made to create a COST –network proposal “Environmental Psychology as an Enrichment for Europe” (EPEE; see Appendix 2). The aim of Epee was “to consolidate the European approach to environmental psychology in its diversity, to make it more visible and to disseminate it more widely so that it can make a significant contribution to the improvement of European wellness.” The proposal was sent to the COST - European Co-operation in Science and Technology (http://www.cost.esf.org/ ), but it was rejected because “Cost Actions emphasize coordination of research rather than training activities and curriculum development”. In other words the proposal was not scientific enough. (See examples of accepted for the second round:

http://www.cost.esf.org/index.php?id=974 ). However, it was stated that the proposal “will enhance the bridging of environmental psychology (EP) theory, research and teaching to environmental action and policy concerning the problems of everyday life and their settings.”

The proposal was intensively discussed in the workshop and it was decided to go on with the working of an improved proposal. According to Pia Björklid it might be a good idea to emphasize that “The European EP is presently quite active and has its own characteristics, such as the long historical past, strong interdependencies between the built and natural environments and the diversity of cultural perspectives. A better coordination and integration of the various European research lines and research groups would enhance the development of a more specific European perspective within the international EP. It is also worth recognising the “triangle of learning” according to which education, research and innovation are the three pillars for European socioeconomic processes and growth. Education is the source of the other two. (www.elearningeurope.info)”

In search of opportunities for funding shared EP research

Different sources for funding were discussed. Aleya promised to check the TEMPUS funds. The next call for Cost-proposals will open in January and close in March 2007. This means that we should start preparing for a proposal of 2-3 pages that focuses on a specific scientific issue (see one accepted proposal http://cevug.ugr.es/massive/ ). There are of course other funding opportunities, such as KFW, the EU 7th framework. I just heard that a new programme, called Life Long Learning, that succeeds Socrates and Leonardo, has been launched. The first call will be published at the end of 2006 and universities can apply in February/March 2007. It will comprise policy projects, modernizing universities, virtual universities, student mobility etc. The problem with, for example, the program for virtual campuses has been that the proposal requires a great deal of prior experience which the group does not so far have. So, hopefully this new programme might suit us. However, the procedures with EU funds are usually quite slow and bureaucratic. Lobbying in Brussels is a must.

The group decided to work on a joint proposal for COST. On the basis of a quick analysis of the specialities represented in the group, the shared theme could be research and promotion of “Healthy or active living environments”. Active living is quite close to healthy environments but concentrates more on the relationship between the physical and social environment and the active life-style of the individual and different groups (for instance in the prevention of obesity; see Sallis, James et al. 2006 An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annual Review of Public Health, 27,1,297-322). The general theme could then be approached through different working groups focusing on E-B theory, concepts and methodology, urban quality for different groups (children, elderly etc.), planning, design and evaluation, as well as pedagogy, dissemination and embedding of active living environments. The latter would the comprise varying e-learning and virtual teaching techniques (Figure 1)

E-B theory,

concepts &

methodology