The influence of a residential outdoor education programme to pupil’s environmental perception

Article

Abstract

This empirical study finds support for the hypothesis that participation in a special residential education programme enhances facets of pupils’ environmental perception. A 4-day extra-curricular educational unit with a cognitive outdoors focus (established in a nature centre in France) was surveyed by using a two stage sampling design in a pre-post-treatment evaluation; the post-test was delayed for a one-month period after participation. All selected participating pupils (n=151) responded twice to the same perception questionnaire. The factorial structure of this questionnaire had been previously developed using a large European sample (n=4500) and separately validated in a smaller French pupil sample (n=900). The matched-pair pre-post-test survey showed significant differences in two of the five primary factors; both of them covered utilitarian preferences and scored in a way which indicated an increase in sensitivity to the environment. A pre-post-tested control group (n=78) revealed no significant difference. Possible reasons for the partial shift in primary factors are discussed, including a consideration of two related studies (in Germany and Switzerland) which were both monitored by the same measurement instrument.

Key words

Empirical evaluation Environmental perception Gender Outdoor education programme Secondary school pupils 

Résumé

L’hypothèse suivante sous-tend cette étude empirique: la participation dans un programme éducatif résidentiel améliore la perception que les élèves ont de l’environment. L’impact d’un stage de 4 jours dans un centre nature en France a été mesuré par un pré et un post-test. Le post-test a été proposé un mois après la participation au stage. Les élèves sélectionnés (N=151) ont répondu deux fois au même questionnaire de perceptions. La structure de ce questionnaire avait été développée avec un large échantillon européen (N=4500) et validé séparément sur un échantillon de 900 élèves français. Les pré et post-tests ont permis de mettre en évidence une différence significative concernant deux des cinq facteurs primaires. Ceux-ci portaient sur les préférences d’utilisation de la nature et indiquaient une augmentation de la sensibilité à l’environnement. Un groupe contrôle pré-et post-test n’a pas de différence significative. Des raisons possibles pour la modification partielle de ces facteurs primaires sont discutées, prenant en considération deux études similaires, basées sur l’utilisation des mêmes instruments de mesure.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Balling, J.D., & Falk, J.H. (1980). A Perspective on Field Trips: Environmental Effects on Learning.Curator 23, 229–240.Google Scholar
  2. Bogner, F.X. (1998a). The Influence of Short-Term Outdoor Ecology Education on Long-Term Variables of Environmental Perception.Journal of Environmental Education, 29, 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bogner, F.X. (1998b). Environmental Perception of Irish and Bavarian Adolescents. A Comparative Empirical Study.The Environmentalist, 18, 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bogner, F.X. (1999). Empirical evaluation of an educational conservation programme introduced in Swiss secondary schools.International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1169–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bogner, F.X., & Wilhelm, M.G. (1996). Environmental Perspectives of Pupils. Development of an Attitude and Behaviour Scale.The Environmentalist, 16, 96–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (1996). Environmental Perspectives of Danish and Bavarian Pupils. Towards a Methodological Framework.Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 41, 53–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (1997). Environmental Perception of Rural and Urban Pupils.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (1998). Environmental Perception of Swiss and Bavarian Pupils.Swiss Journal of Sociology, 24, 547–566.Google Scholar
  9. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (1999). Toward Measuring Adolescent Environmental Perception.European Psychologist, 4, 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (2002). Environmental perception of French and Western European secondary school students.European Journal of psychology of Education, 17(1), 3–18.Google Scholar
  11. Bogner, F.X., Brengelmann, J.C., & Wiseman M. (2000). Risk-taking and Environmental Perception.The Environmentalist, 20, 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bolay, E. (1998).Das Waldschulheim. Eine vergleichende Untersuchung von Waldschulheimaufenthalten unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Wirkung des Auf enthalts auf die Einstellungen zu Arbeit und Umwelt. Verband Deutscher Schullandheime, Hamburg.Google Scholar
  13. Borden, R.E., & Schettino, A.P. (1979). Determinants of environmental responsible behavior.Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 7–13.Google Scholar
  14. Bryant, C.K., & Hungerford, H.R. (1977). An analysis of strategies for teaching environmental concepts and values clarification in Kindergarten.Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 44–45.Google Scholar
  15. Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979).Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Rand McNally, Chicago.Google Scholar
  16. Cornell, J. (1991).Mit Kindern die Natur erleben. Verlag an der Ruhr, Mühlheim.Google Scholar
  17. Crompton, J.L., & Sellar, C. (1981). Do Outdoor Education Experiences Contribute to Positive Development in the Affective Domain?Journal of Environmental Education, 12, 21–29.Google Scholar
  18. De Haan, G. (1997). Paradigmenwechsel.Politische Ökologie, 51, 22–26.Google Scholar
  19. Dewall, B. (1985).Deep ecology. Peregine Smith Books, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
  20. DeYoung, R. (1986). Encouraging environmentally appropriate behavior: The role of intrinsic motivation.Journal of Environmental Systems, 15, 281–292.Google Scholar
  21. Disinger, J.F., & Tomsen, J.L. (1995). Environmental Education Research News.The Environmentalist, 15, 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dunlap, R.E. (1980). Paradigmatic Change in Social Science: From Human Exemptions to an Ecological Paradign.American Behavioral Scientist, 24, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunlap, R.E., & Heffernan, R. (1975). Outdoor recreation and environmental concern: An empirical examination.Rural Sociology, 40, 18–30.Google Scholar
  24. Dunlap, R.E., & Van Liere, K.D. (1978). The “New Environmental Paradigm”,Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10–19.Google Scholar
  25. Dunlap, R.E., & Van Liere, K.D. (1984). Commitment to the Dominant Social Paradigm and concern for environmental quality.Social Science Quarterly, 65, 1013–1028.Google Scholar
  26. Falk, J.H., Martin, W.W., & Balling, J.D. (1978). The novel field trip phenomenon: Adjustment to novel settings interferes with task learning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fazio, R.H., & Zanna, M.P. (1981). Direct experience and attitude-behavior consistency. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology, 14, 161–202, New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gifford, R., Hay, R., & Boros, K. (1982). Individual Differences in Environmental Attitudes.Journal of Environmental Education, 14, 19–22.Google Scholar
  29. Gray, D. (1985).Ecological beliefs and behaviors: Assessment and change. Westport, CT: Greenwood press.Google Scholar
  30. Ham, S.H., & Sewing, D.R. (1986). Barriers to Environmental Education.Journal of Environmental Education, 19, 17–23.Google Scholar
  31. Hendee, J.C. (1969). Rural-urban differences reflected in outdoor recreation activities.Journal of Leisure Research, 1, 333–341.Google Scholar
  32. Hendee, J.C. (1972). Challenging the folklore of environmental education.Journal of Environmental Education, 3, 1–8.Google Scholar
  33. Hines, J.M., Hungerford, H.R., & Tomera, A.N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis.Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 1–8.Google Scholar
  34. Ingenkamp, K.H., Parey, E., & Tent, L. (1973).Schätzen und Messen in der Unterrichtsforschung. Beltz, Weinheim.Google Scholar
  35. Keen, M. (1992). The Effect of the Sunship Earth Program on Knowledge and Attitude Development.Journal of Environmental Education, 22, 28–32.Google Scholar
  36. Kellert, S.R. (1993). Attitudes, knowledge, and behavior toward wildlife among the industrial superpowers: United States, Japan, Germany.Journal of Social Issues, 49, 53–69.Google Scholar
  37. Killermann, W. (1995).Biologieunterricht heute-eine moderne Fachdidaktik. Auer, Donauwörth.Google Scholar
  38. Leeming, C.L., Dwyer, W.O., & Bracken, B.A. (1995). Children’s Environmental Attitude and Knowledge Scale: Construction and Validation.Journal of Environmental Education, 26, 22–31.Google Scholar
  39. Leeming, C.L., Dwyer, W.O., Porter, B.E., & Cobern, M.K. (1993). Outcome Research in Environmental Education.Journal of Environmental Education, 24, 8–21.Google Scholar
  40. Leeming, C.L., Porter, B.E., Dwyer, W.O., Cobern, M.K., & Oliver, D.P. (1997). Effects of Participation in Class Activities on Children’s Environmental Attitudes and Knowledge.Journal of Environmental Education, 28, 33–42.Google Scholar
  41. Lehmann, J. (1999).Befunde empirischer Forschung zu Umweltbildung und Umweltbewußtsein. Leske & Budrich, Opladen.Google Scholar
  42. Leopold, A. (1949).A Sand Country Almanac. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  43. Lucas, A. (1980). Science Education and Environmental Education: Pious Hopes, Self Praise and Disciplinary Chauvinism.Studies in Science Education, 7, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mali, G.B., & Howe, A. (1979). Development of earth and gravity concepts among Nepali children.Science Education, 63/5, 685–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maaßen, B. (1994).Naturerleben oder der andere Zugang zur Natur. Schneider, Hohengehren.Google Scholar
  46. Markl, H. (1995). Wohin geht die Biologie?Biologen in unserer Zeit, 418, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Newhouse, N. (1991). Implications of Attitude and Behavior Research for Environmental Conservation.Journal of Environmental Education, 22, 26–32.Google Scholar
  48. Norusis, M.J. (1993a).SPSS for Windows: Base System User’s Guide. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  49. Norusis, M.J. (1993b).SPSS for Windows: Professional Statistics. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  50. Robottom, I. (1989). Social critique or social control: some problems for evaluation in environmental education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 435–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ryan, C. (1991). The effect of a conservation program on schoolchildren’s attitudes through outdoor education.Journal of Environmental Education, 22, 30–35.Google Scholar
  52. Seligman, C. (1989). Environmental ethics.Journal of Social Issues, 45, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shepard, C.L., & Speelman, L.R. (1985). Affecting environmental attitudes toward the environment.Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 20–23.Google Scholar
  54. Shipstone, D.M., Rhoeneck, C., Jung, W., Kaerrquist, C., Dupin, J.J., Joshua, S., & Licht, P. (1988): A study of student’s understanding of electricity in five European countries.International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sia, A., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. (1985). Selected predictors of responsible environmental behavior.Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 31–40.Google Scholar
  56. Siegel, S. (1956).Non-parametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  57. Sivek, D.J., & Hungerford, H. (1990). Predictors of responsible behavior in members of three Wisconsin conservation organizations.Journal of Environmental Education, 21, 35–40.Google Scholar
  58. Stapp, W.B., Bennett, D., Bryan, W., Fulton, J., McGregor, J., Novak, P., Wan, J., Wall, R., & Havlick, S. (1969). The concept of environmental education.Journal of Environmental Education, 1, 30–31.Google Scholar
  59. Tanner, T. (1980). Significant life experience. A new research area in environmental education.Journal of Environmental Education, 11, 20–24.Google Scholar
  60. Thompson, J.C., & Gasteiger, E.L. (1985). Environmental Attitude Survey of University Students: 1971 vs. 1981.Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 13–22.Google Scholar
  61. Trommer, G. (1991).Natur wahrnelimen mit der Rucksackschule. Praxis Pädagogik, Braunschweig.Google Scholar
  62. Van Matre, S. (1993).Earth Education. A New Beginning. The Institute for Earth Education. Greenville, WV.Google Scholar
  63. Winkel, G. (1995).Umwelt und Bildung: Denk- und Praxisan regungen für eine ganzheitliche Natur- und Unwelterziehung. Kallmeyer, Seelze.Google Scholar
  64. Wood, H.W. (1974). Environmental Education and the Wilderness Idea.Journal of Environmental Education, 6, 50–52.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Lisbon, Portugal/ Springer Netherlands 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Biology and its Didactics, Institute of Natural SciencesUniversity of EducationLudwigsburgGermany

Personalised recommendations