Relationships between outdoor environmental education program characteristics and children’s environmental values and behaviors

ABSTRACT

Outdoor environmental education programs frequently aim to influence participants’ environmental values and behaviors. Published studies have frequently documented their success in doing so. However, few studies have examined the characteristics of programs in relation to accomplishing those goals. Using characteristics identified as important in the Real World Learning Model, this study investigated five residential outdoor environmental education programs in the Czech Republic. Findings include statistically significant correlations between participants’ views of program characteristics and their environmental values and self-reported behaviors. Structural equation models demonstrate that the relationship between program characteristics was mediated by participants’ environmental values. For participants with positive values, program characteristics more strongly influence behavior. For those with less positive values, the program characteristics are less influential. Program effectiveness seems to be influenced by an interplay between students’ environmental values and the instructional strategies used in the program.

KEYWORDS:

• Environmental education
• outdoor learning
• environmental values
• environmental behavior
• real world learning model

Acknowledgments

This article is one of the outputs of the project Promoting Behavioral and Value Change through Outdoor Environmental Education, which is supported by grant no. GA18-15374S provided by the Czech Science Foundation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

2-MEV (values)

Preservation

1 POST Human interference in nature often leads to catastrophic or harmful effects.

2 POST People mistreat the nature.

3 POST If things do not change, we will soon be facing big environmental disaster.

Intent of Support

4 POST If I had extra money, I would give them to nature protection.

5 POST I would help raise money to protect nature.

6 POST I am making effort to tell others that the nature is important.

7 POST If I have a choice, I prefer drinking water from a tap than water bought in bottles.

8 POST If I have opportunity, I will take part in an event organized by local environmentalists.

9 POST I would be willing to buy environment-friendly food.

Utilization

10 POST People have the right to change the environment to their benefit.

11 POST Building new roads is so important that trees should be cut down.

12 POST Because mosquitoes live in swamps, we should drain the swamps and use the land for farming.

13 POST To feed people, wilderness must be turned into farmland.

14 POST People are supposed to rule over the nature.

15 POST Weeds should be killed because they take up space from plants we need

16 POST I like a grass lawn more than a meadow where flowers grow on their own.

Appreciation

17 POST I like to watch and listen to birds.

18 POST Every now and then I take time to watch the clouds pass by.

19 POST Sometimes I watch stars at night.

20 POST Every now and then I make time to smell flowers.

21 POST Listening to the sounds of nature always makes me relax.

GEB (Behavior)

22 DELAY I recycle paper at home or at school.

23 DELAY When leaving a room the last, I always switch off the lights

24 DELAY If I see people acting badly to nature, I immediately tell them.

25 DELAY In my free time I watch nature shows on the Internet or on television.

26 DELAY I speak with my parents about how it is possible to help with solving environmental problems.

27 DELAY I try to help the environment at our school.

28 DELAY In my free time, I participate in events to help the environment.

29 DELAY I often read about nature and the environment.

30 DELAY When I am deciding what to take out of the refrigerator, I leave the doors closed.

31 DELAY I place birdhouses or feeding spots near my home.

RWL Program Characteristics

Meaningfulness

24 POST I always knew why it was important to do the activities we were doing.

25R POST Some of the activities we were doing were pointless. (REVERSE SCORE)

Transferability

26 POST We learned in the program how everything around us is interconnected.

27 POST We learned in the program that when I do something at home or at school, I can change things in other places or in other countries.

28 POST We learned in the program that what nature looks like today was influenced by the decisions people made in the past.

29 POST We learned in the program that when people interfere with something in the nature, they can change the nature for many, many years.

30 POST We learned in the program that the nature where it took place is in some way connected with the nature at our place.

Experiential Learning

31 POST Most of the activities we did in the program took place outdoors

32 POST We had always enough time within the program to explore the nature around us.

33 POST When I experienced something important in the course of the program, I had time to think it over and share my feelings with others.

34 POST When we learned something in the program, we had later chance to apply it.

35 POST During the program, we were motivated by the lecturers to use what we learned at home or at school.

Empowerment

36 POST I always had opportunity to suggest what we could learn about nature in the course of the program.

37 POST When I wanted to explore something deeper in the nature, I always got time for it during the program.

38 POST I had lot of opportunities for cooperation with my classmates during the program.

39 POST In some activities of the program, we had opportunity to make decisions on our own and then experience the consequences of our decisions.

Encouragement

40 POST The lecturers of the program clearly explained to us what we could do to help nature.

41 POST I felt motivated by the program lecturers to start doing something to help nature at home.

42 POST It would be great if everyone treated nature the same way as the lecturers of the program.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation [GA18-15374S].

Notes on contributors

Bruce Johnson

Bruce Johnson is Professor of Environmental Learning and Dean of the College of Education at the University of Arizona. He was previously an elementary and middle school teacher in Arizona and New Mexico, director of outdoor schools in New Mexico and Australia, and co-owner/co-director of a wilderness adventure company. Dr. Johnson’s research includes the teaching and learning of ecological concepts, development of environmental values/attitudes and actions, and curriculum development. He also serves as Director of the Earth Education Research and Evaluation (EERE) Team, which has conducts research on children’s ecological understandings, environmental values/attitudes, and environmental actions.

Jan Činčera

Jan Cincera is Associate Professor in the Department of Environmental Studies, Faculty of Social Studies at Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. His main interest lies in program evaluation and in analyzing instructional strategies applied in environmental education programs. He cooperates with environmental education centers in the Czech Republic and other countries.