When foresters ask me, as a university academic, about forestry education, they appear to be thinking predominately about bachelor, master’s and PhD programs that include ‘forestry’ or ‘forest science’ in their titles. In the course of these conversations, many foresters lament the demise of the four-year professional and ‘named’ forestry bachelor degrees in Australia, now that the Australian National University (ANU) and the University of Melbourne have disestablished their programs (although the Bachelor of Forest Science and Management continues at Southern Cross University (SCU)). With the exception of the SCU’s Bachelor and Master of Forest Science and Management, and ANU’s Master of Forestry, no bachelor or master’s programs in Australia now include the words ‘forestry’ or ‘forest science’. Tertiarylevel students can and still do enrol in bachelor and master’s programs with titles that include ‘environment’, ‘ecosystem’, ‘sustainability’ or ‘conservation’, in which they can craft programs comprising courses that focus on ‘forestry’. The ANU, for example, offers three master’s programs in its Fenner School of Environment and Society—‘Environment’; ‘Environmental Science’; and ‘Forestry’—and candidates in each of these can focus on forestry and include courses that cover essentials like silviculture, mensuration, forest policy and management. Nevertheless, there remains a perception that a forest focus is optional and all too easily diluted unless the program is specifically named. In the ANU master’s programs, only graduates in the Master of Forestry typically self-identify as foresters, and only those graduates are required to take forestry-oriented courses that are optional for the others. ‘Education’ is increasingly defined in wide-ranging terms: for example, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO 2016, fig. 0.1, reproduced in Fig. 1) identifies ‘formal’, ‘non-formal’ and ‘informal’ forms of education, at multiple levels. A focus on named bachelor and master’s programs as ‘the’ level at which forestry education occurs misses many types and levels where the whole concept of forestry can be learned and practised. For example, there are formal apprenticeships, certificates and diplomas (at International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 3–4 or, at the graduate level, ISCED 6–7) in which participants focus on technical or other bounded aspects of forestry needed to keep the industry and profession viable. In 2019, the University of the Sunshine Coast and the University of Tasmania both proposed a number of new graduate certificates and diplomas to focus on wood science, engineering, harvesting and wood use. These levels of education could lead to graduates who support improved productivity, stronger economic growth and better service delivery in forest management and wood use (World Bank 2018). A recent ANU Master of Environment graduate, Dollie Yao (whose thesis abstract appears in this issue), examined the potential for forestry education at ISCED level 3 (upper secondary) (Yao 2019). She concluded that, although there are numerous opportunities within the Australian core curriculum to incorporate forestry and, as a next step, to promote proforests behaviour that emphasises wise forest management and use, forests are rarely incorporated or are only represented indirectly in course curricula. Where forests are included, Yao found that they are typically portrayed in narrow or negative contexts (e.g. deforestation). She suggests that individual teachers, passionate and appropriately resourced, would be key to realising the pro-environment and pro-forests potential of Australian upper secondary education. In support of this, the ForestLearning initiative (http://forestlearning.edu.au/) is providing free pro-environment and pro-forestry material to support authorised school curricula. Formal education also extends to Early Childhood (ISCED 0), and there appears to be a resurgence of efforts to ensure that early childhood is partly experienced ‘outdoors’. ‘Forest kindergartens’, ‘bush kinders’ and ‘nature schools’ are appearing in Australia, where 3–6-year-olds spend substantial, if not all their, learning time outside school buildings and in ‘nature’. Of course, trees feature in all these schools, from which students can move through the formal education system with the foundational knowledge that they are part of the environment and can learn and work in the forests. As Figure 1 indicates, formal learning is only part of the education environment. Non-formal education is increasingly available via digital platforms, ranging from podcast series through to ‘massively open online courses’ (MOOCs), which may provide certificates of completion. Many of the MOOCs involve university input but do not necessarily meet ISCED standards. A number of available MOOCs mention ‘forest’, although the range is eclectic—from poetry and photography to ecology, sustainability and human history. Informal education can be even more varied and variable, ranging from media and outlets that have high editorial standards and production quality (e.g. BBC documentaries, digital platforms like The Conversation and high-quality print outlets) through to enthusiast and ‘conspiracy-theory’ opportunities like some YouTube and podcast series with agenda-based products. Non-formal and informal education cannot easily be monitored, and even truth-checking is limited, but unfortunately it now forms the majority of the ‘education’ that people receive on forestry and the environment. For example, it is much easier to make a dramatic and powerful newspaper headline or YouTube video on deforestation (and, by association, forestry) than to follow the cycles and nuances of

中文翻译：

---

超越标准、非原创的林业教育

作为一名大学学者，当林务员问我有关林业教育的问题时，他们似乎主要考虑在他们的标题中包含“林业”或“森林科学”的学士、硕士和博士课程。在这些谈话过程中，许多林务工作者感叹澳大利亚四年制专业和“命名”林业学士学位的消亡，现在澳大利亚国立大学（ANU）和墨尔本大学已经取消了他们的课程（尽管学士学位森林科学与管理继续在南十字星大学（SCU））。除了 SCU 的森林科学与管理学士和硕士，以及澳大利亚国立大学的林业硕士，澳大利亚现在没有学士或硕士课程包含“林业”或“森林科学”这两个词。大专学生可以而且仍然可以注册学士和硕士课程，其标题包括“环境”、“生态系统”、“可持续性”或“保护”，在这些课程中，他们可以制作包含专注于“林业”的课程的课程。例如，澳大利亚国立大学在其芬纳环境与社会学院提供三个硕士课程——“环境”；《环境科学》；和“林业”——其中每一个的考生都可以专注于林业，包括涵盖诸如造林、测定、森林政策和管理等基本知识的课程。尽管如此，仍然存在一种看法，即森林重点是可选的，并且很容易被淡化，除非该计划被明确命名。在澳大利亚国立大学硕士课程中，只有林业硕士毕业生通常自称是林务员，只有那些毕业生才需要参加其他人选修的林业类课程。“教育”的定义越来越广泛：例如，联合国教育、科学及文化组织（UNESCO 2016，图 0.1，复制于图 1）将“正规”、“非正规”和“多层次的非正式'教育形式。将命名的学士和硕士课程作为林业教育发生的“层次”，忽略了可以学习和实践整个林业概念的许多类型和层次。例如，有正式的学徒制、证书和文凭（国际教育标准分类 (ISCED) 3-4 或在研究生阶段，ISCED 6-7），参与者专注于保持行业和专业可行性所需的林业技术或其他有限方面。2019年，阳光海岸大学和塔斯马尼亚大学都提出了多项新的研究生证书和文凭，重点关注木材科学、工程、采伐和木材利用。这些教育水平可能导致毕业生支持提高生产力、更强劲的经济增长和更好的森林管理和木材使用服务（世界银行，2018 年）。最近澳大利亚国立大学环境硕士毕业生 Dollie Yao（其论文摘要出现在本期）研究了 ISCED 3 级（高中）林业教育的潜力（Yao 2019）。她得出的结论是，尽管澳大利亚的核心课程中有很多机会将林业纳入其中，并作为下一步促进强调明智森林管理和利用的森林行为，但森林很少纳入或仅在课程课程中间接体现。在包括森林的地方，姚发现它们通常被描绘在狭隘或负面的背景下（例如森林砍伐）。她建议，热情且资源适当的教师个人将是实现澳大利亚高中教育有利于环境和有利于森林的潜力的关键。为此，ForestLearning 倡议 (http://forestlearning.edu.au/) 正在提供免费的亲环境和亲林业材料，以支持授权的学校课程。正规教育也延伸到幼儿期（ISCED 0），并且似乎重新开始努力确保幼儿部分地在“户外”体验。澳大利亚出现了“森林幼儿园”、“丛林幼儿园”和“自然学校”，3-6 岁的孩子在校舍外和“自然”中度过了大量（如果不是全部）学习时间。当然，所有这些学校都以树木为特色，学生可以从这些学校进入正规教育系统，并获得他们是环境的一部分并可以在森林中学习和工作的基础知识。如图 1 所示，正规学习只是教育环境的一部分。非正规教育越来越多地通过数字平台提供，从播客系列到“大规模开放在线课程”（MOOC），可以提供结业证书。许多 MOOC 涉及大学的投入，但不一定符合 ISCED 标准。许多可用的 MOOC 都提到了“森林”，尽管范围不拘一格——从诗歌和摄影到生态学、可持续性和人类历史。非正式教育可以更加多样化和多变，从具有高编辑标准和制作质量的媒体和媒体（例如 BBC 纪录片、The Conversation 等数字平台和高质量印刷媒体）到狂热者和“阴谋论”机会像一些基于议程的产品的 YouTube 和播客系列。非正规和非正式教育不容易被监控，甚至真相核查也很有限，但不幸的是，它现在构成了人们接受的林业和环境“教育”的大部分。例如，