Examining predictors of teachers use of environment based education: Implications for teacher preparation

Author(s):

Armağan Ateşkan(presenting / submitting)Jennie F. Lane(presenting)Öykü Dulun

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

30. Environmental and Sustainability Education Research (ESER)

Format:

Paper

Session Information

30 SES 03 B, Teacher's Meta Emotions and Place

Paper Session

Time:

2016-08-23

17:15-18:45

Room:

NM-G109

Chair:

Marco Rieckmann

Contribution

Research question

What are predictors for teachers’ use of environment-based education?

Objectives

To identify strategies and conditions to support teachers use of outdoor settings during teaching practice.
To improve environment-based education in teacher professional development programs

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study is derived from theories proposed by classic articles regarding predictors of environmental behaviors along with findings from more recent studies about teachers’ use of environment-based education strategies. A classic study by Sia, Hungerford, & Tomera (1985/86) examined variables that may predict behaviors of environmentally active individuals. Their research concluded that knowledge of and skills for action strategies and environmental sensitivity are strong predictors of environmental participation and need to be addressed in teacher education. In a related study, Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera (1987) proposed a model of predictors of environmental behavior that included knowledge, locus of control, attitudes, commitment, and sense of responsibility. Later, Hungerford & Volk (1990) built upon these earlier studies to explain how the variables relate to each other starting from sensitivity toward the environment, increasing knowledge, to empowering opportunities, resulting in environmentally responsible behaviors. To further examine these models, Hsu and Roth (1998) conducted a study to identify a set of predictors for secondary teachers’ environmentally responsible behaviors. They confirmed the importance of environmental knowledge of skills, and it is interesting to note they also identified “area of residence” among their variables. They found that most of the teachers worked in areas they grew up and that teachers in urban settings were more environmentally active than those in rural locations.

In the current study, the aim is to identify predictors of teacher behaviors related to taking students outdoors. In addition to reviewing the literature related to predictors of environmentally responsible behavior, the framework for this study relied on a study by Ernst (2007) where she developed an instrument to identify influential barriers preventing teachers from taking students outside. Immersing students in their natural world, as well as with their built communities, has been shown to be important to developing healthy and creative mind (Amos & Reiss, 2011; Berman & Davis-Berman, 2005; Mansuroğlu & Sabanci, 2010). In her study, Ernst found lack of training to be the most significant factor that influenced teacher behavior. The present study builds on Ernst’s work to more specifically look at motivational factors that may predict teachers’ outdoor education practices.

Investigations into to responsible environmental behavior, in light of behavior change theories related, are occurring more frequently in the literature. Kollmuss & Agyeman (2002) incorporated models and frameworks from fields outside of environmental education, including psychology and social sciences, to help bridge the “gap” between knowing about the environment and being active in the environment. Their model diagrams how internal and external factors interact to overcome barriers and old behaviors related to environmental behavior. This model and others were reviewed by Heimlich & Ardoin (2008) who affirmed that to promote environmentally responsible behaviors, it is important to incorporate behavior change strategies in environmental education.

Therefore, this study will incorporate factors, identified in the research, that have been found to motivate behaviors; it will triangulate behavior change models, aspects of motivational theory, and environment-based education. By examining predictors of teachers’ use of environment-based education, the outcomes of this study can inform programs that prepare future teachers on ways to improve their methods courses and better showcase the merits and benefits of student learning outside the classroom.

Method

Participants Graduates of the teacher education program of a non-profit university in Turkey and who are actively be a teacher formed the sample of the study. Of the 290 students who graduated before 2014, 153 met the inclusion criteria. The survey was announced to all 153 teachers through e-mail and alumni Facebook group page. The response rate was 44.4% (N=68). 82.4% of the participants are female, and 97.1% of them are working at private school. The majority of them (70.6%) are teaching at secondary school. Research Instrument We received permission to adapt a survey that was developed by Julie Ernst (2007) for finding out the teachers’ experiences about environment-based education. The instrument was composed of four sections. The first section included 13 items to obtain information about the participants, their teaching experience and whether they take students out of classroom or not. The two items in the second section asked if and how the teachers’ take students outside. The third section contained 25 Likert scale question ranging from Strongly agree to Strongly disagree where teachers reported facilitators (i.e. High comfort level with the outdoors, the grade level they teach, adequate funding) of environment-based education. Later at the same section, two open-ended questions asked teachers’ to identify which of the factors were the strongest facilitators for taking students to environment, and what percent of their total teaching year is spent on environment-based education or a similar outdoor education approach. In the fourth section there were 17 Likert scale questions that used the same range at the third section, which is about the barriers (i.e. concerns regarding safety, liability, and classroom management, lack of funding, lack of planning time) of environmental education according to teachers. The participants who received the study are fluent English speakers; therefore, the instrument was written and administered in English. In this study, the reliability check for Cronbach’s alpha resulted in the score of .943 (N=68) for facilitators and .938 (N=68) for barriers. The survey was created using a Google Docs form and administered via email. Data analysis The survey was completed in June 2015 and initial analysis began in September. The primary analysis involved a review of the demographic frequencies and means, facilitators, and obstacles. A Multiple Regression Analysis was conducted to determine which factors could significantly predict the amount of time teachers used environment-based education strategies as part of their teaching.

Expected Outcomes

To learn the best predictors for the amount of time teachers used environment-based education strategies as part of their teaching, a multiple regression analysis was conducted for one dependent variable by using the three independent variables. It was found that teachers’ decisions to use environment-based education as part of their instruction are influenced by the grade level they teach, the amount of parental support and their openness to different teaching methods. The results of multiple regression analysis indicated the these three predictors explained 68.7% of the variance (R2=.74, F(3,15)=14.16, p<.05), as did agreeableness (β=.815, p<.05, β=-.614, p<.05, β=.416, p<.05)The multiple regression results suggest that the grade level teachers teach had significant positive regression weights, indicating that the higher the grade level the teachers teach the higher percentage of their total teaching year was devoted to place-based education or a similar outdoor education approach. Their openness to different teaching methods had significant positive regression weights as well, indicating that the more the teachers are open to different teaching methods the more they have higher percent of their total teaching year with environment based education or a similar outdoor education approach. Interestingly, the multiple regression results suggests that parental support had significant negative regression weights, indicating that the lower the parental support the teachers received, they expected to have a higher percent of their total teaching year with place-based education.

References

Amos, R., & Reiss, M. (2011). The benefits of residential fieldwork for school science: Insights from a five-year initiative for inner-city students in the UK. International Journal of Science Education, 34(4), 485–511. Berman, D. S., & Davis-Berman, J. (2005). Positive psychology and outdoor education. Journal of Experiential Education, 28(1), 17-24. Clark, C., and P. Peterson. 1986. “Teachers’ Though Processes.” In Handbook of Research and Teaching, edited by M. Wittrock, 255–296. New York: Macmillan. Ernst, J. (2007). Factors associated with K-12 teachers' use of environment-based education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38:3, 15-32, DOI: 10.3200/JOEE.38.3.15-32 Heimlich, J. E., & Ardoin, N. M. (2008). Understanding behavior to understand behavior change: A literature review. Environmental education research, 14(3), 215-237. Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of environmental education, 18(2), 1-8. Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The journal of environmental education, 21(3), 8-21. Hsu, S. J., & Roth, R. E. (1998). An assessment of environmental literacy and analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behaviour held by secondary teachers in the Hualien area of Taiwan. Environmental education research, 4(3), 229-249. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?.Environmental education research, 8(3), 239-260. Mansuroğlu, S., & Sabanci, A. (2010). Evaluating primary schools’ gardens in terms of environmental contribution to student learning: A case study in Antalya, Turkey. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, 8(2), 1097-1102. Sia, A.P., Hungerford, H.R. & Tomera, A.N. (1985/86). Selected predictors of responsible environmental behaviour: an analysis, Journal of Environmental Education, 17(2), pp. 31-40.

Author Information

Armağan Ateşkan (presenting / submitting)

Bilkent University

Graduate School of Education

Ankara

Jennie F. Lane (presenting)

Bilkent University, Turkey

Öykü Dulun

Bilkent Erzurum Laboratory School, Turkey

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.