This is concerning the Ecological Literacy essay, which is taken from Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World, a book by David W. Orr. .
In the essay, he argues that our educational system is producing a generation of "ecological yahoos" who don't have "a clue why the color of the water in their rivers is related to their food supply, or why storms are becoming more severe as the planet warms." (300) These are the people who will be voting and consuming and will by implication be making decisions that will have a negative impact on our shared world, ultimately leading to the creation of an unsustainable world (and thus the end of most or all species. This is not stated explicitly but seems to be the logical conclusion of this train of thought.) Part of his argument is that a lack of intimate knowledge of our natural landscapes can only lead to impoverished "mental landscapes" as well. The given cure for this is a rethinking of our educational system (both it's content and its methods) and restructuring it to include an ecological perspective. However, he does not state in this piece how the curriculum should be altered specifically (perhaps he does so in the book which this is taken from; I could not get a hold of a copy to check.), but the general statements he makes point educators (or soon to be educators) clearly in the direction they should go. He outlines the basics of his theory on pgs. 304-305, the foundation on which the new education must sit. His argument is very strong in reasoning and his argument is very convincing but doesn't have a lot of numbers or research to back it up (again, of course, these might be detailed and explored more fully in the book). I agree with what Orr is saying here but I have not done the scientific research to back up most of the viewpoints I have about the world around me.
The main problem I have with his theory is that it rests on a shaky foundation itself.