Cover Image

PAPERBACK
$55.00



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 148


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 147
9 Perspectives on Environmental Education in the United States John Ramsey and Harold R. Hungerford This chapter addresses the question of what environmental education (EE) is, explores some of its critical challenges, and describes an effective, long-standing curricular approach to environmental education and its re- search implications. OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION Let' s begin with the concept of environmental education. According to Stapp (1969), environmental education is aimed at producing a citizenry that is knowl- edgeable about the biophysical environment and its associated problems, aware of how to solve these problems, and motivated to work toward their solution. An important element implied by this definition is a problem-solving approach, per- haps characterized as informed decision making in a democratic society at both personal and societal levels. Disinger (1983), Harvey (1977), Simmons (2000), and others state a similar conceptualization. This concept is congruent with the progressive philosophy of American education, a tenet of which is the fostering of citizenship participation in a democracy. The progressive, "responsible citizen" approach to environmental education is taken by the North American Association for Environmental Education (NAAEE), the largest environmental education organization in the United States. This organization incorporated the problem-solving approach into a national pol- icy document, Excellence in Environmental Education: Guidelines for Learning (NAAEE, 1999a). This document, which operationalized critical knowledge, skills, and dispositions, can be viewed as the field's standards. Modeled on other recent national education policy guidelines, such as the mathematics and 147

OCR for page 147
148 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES science education standards, it draws heavily not only on the work of the Amer- ican authors cited earlier but also on two major international policy documents, the Belgrade Charter (1975) and the Tbilisi Declaration (1977~. Both of these international policy documents were developed as a result of the United Nations' interest in human activity and the environment. A significant amount of controversy remains about the definition of envi- ronmental education. Some writers express the need for an ecology-based ap- proach rather than the problem-solving one implicit in the technology-capitalism dimension of Western society. They claim that ecology must be the basis for human activity and that ecological parameters cannot simply be factored into an economic equation of costs and benefits. European writers and others take a postmodern approach, emphasizing individual development and opposing a sys- temic, outcomes-based approach. These writers decry top-down, prescriptive policies and behavior-based curricula. Disinger (1983) provides a more com- plete treatment of the definitional aspects of environmental education. Regard- less of definition, the following characteristics appear to be essential elements in most environmental education perspectives. Environmental education is based on knowledge of ecology and social systems, drawing on disci plines in the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities; reaches beyond biological and physical phenomena to consider social, economic, political, technological, cultural, historic, moral, and aesthetic aspects of environmental issues; recognizes that the understanding of feelings, values, attitude, and per- ceptions at the center of environmental issues is essential to analyzing and resolving these issues; and emphasizes critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed for in- formed, reasoned personal decisions and public action (Disinger and Monroe, 1994~. . . The major challenges to effective environmental education in the United States are interrelated, and so there is no significance implied by the discussion order that follows. One major challenge for the field is that it lacks a formal niche in the K-12 curriculum, suggesting that it is not in the mainstream of American education. This situation arises in part from the decentralized nature of the U.S. school system, with each state and school district declaring its own independent curriculum. It is also related to the multidisciplinary nature of the field, a characteristic that makes it difficult for environmental education to fit into a disciplinary curricular system that is responding more and more to "basics- only" demands for accountability rather than to the broad dimensions of a liberal, general education. Environmental education is either ignored or viewed by main- stream educators as a supplement to the curriculum that must justify its inclusion by enriching other subjects, such as history and science. In our view, the role of

OCR for page 147
JOHN RAMSEY AND HAROLD R. HUNGERFORD 149 environmental education in American education will remain marginal unless a K-16 curricular niche is established for it. It is not surprising that today's teachers are not prepared to teach environ- mental education. Neither the formal education curricula nor teachers' profes- sional training experiences have prepared them for this instructional challenge. Very little environmental education is required of preservice teachers (i.e., those in training who have not yet begun their teaching careers), and there is limited organizational infrastructure for it at the state level. Fewer than 15 percent of preservice teachers take a formal EE course, and state-level data are equally slim. Kirk et al. (1993) offer perhaps the most recent state-level overview. The current teaching force lacks training in environmental education, and there is no provision for it in the preservice training of new teachers or in ongoing in- . . . service training. Most EE curricular materials were designed as supplemental lessons to be infused episodically into a given curriculum (for instance, Project WILD, Project Learning Tree). A plethora of print and video materials of highly variable quality is offered by many private and public curriculum developers. Some of these materials have been described as biased, inaccurate, incomplete, or propagandiz- ing by both critics and supporters of environmental education. In the face of this criticism, NAAEE has developed a set of guidelines for developing, selecting, and evaluating materials (NAAEE, l999b). The guidelines address fairness and accuracy, balanced viewpoints, depth of understanding, critical and creative thinking, and civic responsibility, as well as other instructional criteria. Major initiatives are needed to evaluate existing curricula to ensure that the highest quality products are recommended. Despite attempts to upgrade the quality of EE materials, conservative factions in the United States continue to criticize materials that are related to specific issues (e.g., the greenhouse effect). Instead they promote a version of environmental science that is "fact based." For exam- ple, the study of eutrophication as a concept meaning the process of a body of water's becoming rich in nutrients but deficient in oxygen is acceptable to them, but the examination of eutrophication as a function of nonpoint pollution in Galveston Bay, Texas, and of its sources, is not acceptable. A MODEL CURRICULUM One environmental education curriculum program, called Investigating and Evaluating Environmental Issues and Actions (IEEIA), has been developed over time, accumulating an extensive research and evaluation base (Hungerford et al., 1996; Ramsey, 2000; Winther, 2000~. It meets the NAAEE guidelines and aug- ments many of the outcomes identified by other discipline standards, such as national science standards. It is structured for insertion (as opposed to supple- mental infusion) into the curriculum. And it has been the target of numerous research and evaluation publications.

OCR for page 147
150 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES Its initial development was as a one-semester curriculum designed for use at the middle school level. Subsequently, it was published in two themes, environ- mental and science-technology-society, and in two formats, modular and case study. These changes expanded the initial program' s use from Grade 5 through high school. The case study programs use the same instructional structure as the initial IEEIA program but are built around specific topics, including coastal marine issues, endangered species issues, and solid waste issues. The following discussion focuses on the environmental theme and the modular format. The model grew out of one teacher' s desire to allow his junior high school students both to investigate environmental issues of interest to them and to enable them to develop the skills needed to conduct such an issue-based investigation. Over the years the model has been refined as more and more teachers and students have provided input and as more research information has become avail- able. In addition, it became apparent early in the development process that a component of citizenship participation (i.e., citizen action) was needed because students often wished to do something about the issues they investigated after completing their research. Today, the published versions of the curriculum re- flect generally accepted instructional goals beginning with background informa- tion that leads to issue awareness, issue investigation and evaluation, and citizen- ship participation/issue resolution. The curriculum is organized into a series of six modules or chapters. The modules are interdisciplinary in nature and introduce students to the characteris- tics of issues, the skills needed for obtaining and processing information, the skills needed for analyzing and investigating issues, and the skills needed by responsible citizens for issue resolution. The following description provides a brief overview of each module. Module I: Environmental Problem Solving: This module contains lessons using actual environmental issues to develop the skills necessary to understand and analyze issues independently. These skills include discriminating among the interrelationships of events, problems, and issues, as well as understanding the role of beliefs and values in issues. Issue analysis, the skill of unpacking the critical components of an issue, is introduced and practiced. The concept of interaction, that is, the interrelatedness of human activities and the natural world, is also introduced, demonstrated, and applied. Rather than focus on a particular body of information or ideas, these lessons focus on the skills necessary for students to analyze the complexity of environmental issues. Module II: Getting Started on Issue Investigation: These lessons begin the skills necessary to start an issue investigation. Students identify issues, write research questions, and learn how to obtain information from secondary sources and how to compare and evaluate information sources. These lessons focus on finding, analyzing, and evaluating secondary source information about issues. Module III: Using Surveys, Questionnaires, and Opinionnaires in Environ- mental Investigations: Students learn how to obtain information using primary

OCR for page 147
JOHN RAMSEY AND HAROLD R. HUNGERFORD 151 methods of investigation. Initially, they learn how to develop surveys, question- naires, and "opinionnaires." Subsequently, they learn sampling techniques, how to administer data collection instruments, and how to record collected data. These lessons focus on social science inquiry skills in the context of environ- mental beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Module IV: Interpreting Data From Investigations: Students learn how to draw conclusions, make inferences, and formulate recommendations. They also learn how to produce and interpret graphs. These lessons prepare students to interpret and communicate findings using data related to environmental issues. Module V: Investigating an Environmental Issue: Students autonomously select and investigate an issue. This process involves the application and synthe- sis of skills learned thus far. The model's developers recommend that students' investigations be reported back to their peers in formal classroom presentations. In this section of the program, students "take over," undertaking an inquiry into an authentic environmental issue approved and facilitated by the teacher. Module VI: Environmental Action Strategies: Students learn the major methods of citizenship action, analyze the effectiveness of individual versus group action, and develop issue resolution action plans. This action plan is evaluated against a set of predetermined criteria designed to assess the social, cultural, and ecological implications of citizenship actions. Finally, the action plan may be implemented if the students wish. In this section students use their investigation data to formulate a plan for possible participation as a citizen in the solution of the issue under investigation. The recommended outcomes of the program are to enable students to inquire successfully into ill-defined problems, demonstrate responsible citizenship in the community, interact successfully with environmental issues, use higher-order thinking skills, and think reflectively in terms of alternative positions related to issues. The foundation of the program is the preparation for and undertaking of an authentic environmental investigation on the part of a student or a small group of students. Its structure provides a framework for teachers and students to manage complex intellectual activities. It is important to note that the most powerful educational experiences for students result from projects for investigation that they choose in their local community or region. IEEIA has its roots in a variety of philosophical perspectives, beginning with John Dewey, who wrote at length on instructional models that reflect the democratic process and the scientific method. A number of eminent educators who followed Dewey either supported the same notion or independently arrived at a similar philosophy of education. Among these were Kilpatrick (progressive

OCR for page 147
152 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES education), Counts (social problem solving and reconstructionism), and Hullfish and Smith (reflectivity). Curricular approaches such as IEEIA are structured to help learners under- stand that democracy for a social group involves the investigation of problems and the development of solutions. Furthermore, this model provides for an attempt at issue resolution by having learners choose a desired method for help- ing resolve the issue (i.e., an action plan) and subsequently evaluate that method. In these ways, this model appears to reflect progressivism quite well. And, given that students' action plans often call for some form of social reform, the model carries with it characteristics associated with reconstructionism as well. RESEARCH ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIOR The previous discussion noted that problem solving in terms of personal and social environmental decision making is a critical goal of environmental educa- tion. Given this, let's look at what is known about responsible environmental behavior. A number of studies of adults have been done from an environmental education perspective that offer insight into the relevant psychological attributes (Hines et al., 1986/1987; Sia et al., 1985/1986; Sivek, 1989/1990; Lierman, 1995; Marcinkowski, 2000; yolk and McBeth, 2000; Zelezny, 2000~. (Studies from other perspectives are discussed elsewhere in this volume: Schultz, Chapter 4; Lutzenhiser, Chapter 3; Th0gerson, Chapter 5; Stern, Chapter 12.) Hines et al. (1986/1987) conducted a meta-analysis of research on responsible environmen- tal behavior, reviewing studies from a variety of fields and using statistical pro- cedures to determine the strength of the relationship between responsible envi- ronmental behavior and associated variables. Positive correlations were found for verbal commitment, locus of control, attitude, personal responsibility, knowl- edge, education level, income, and economic orientation. Using Hines' findings, Sia et al. (1985/1986) studied the predictors of environmental behavior in two populations of adults, one environmentally active and the other environmentally inactive. Sia's prediction model was based on eight variables, six of which were determined to be significant using regression analysis procedures and which accounted for 52 percent of the variance. The findings indicated that skill in using action strategies, environmental sensitivity, and knowledge of environ- mental action strategies accounted for the majority of the variance. Sia's find- ings were replicated by Sivek (1989/1990) and extended by Marcinkowski (2000) and Lierman (1995~. Thus, the research indicates that responsible environmental behavior is associated with the following variables: Environmental sensitivity (i.e., feelings of comfort in and empathy to- ward natural areas), Knowledge of ecological concepts, Knowledge of environmental problems and issues,

OCR for page 147
JOHN RAMSEY AND HAROLD R. HUNGERFORD 153 Skill in identifying, analyzing, investigating, and evaluating environmen- tal problems and solutions, Beliefs and values (i.e., beliefs are what individuals hold to be true, and values are what they hold to be important regarding problems/issues and alternative solution/action strategies), Knowledge of environmental action strategies (i.e., consumerism, politi- cal action, persuasion, legal action, and physical actions), Skill in using environmental action strategies, and Internal locus of control (i.e., the belief that by working alone or with others an individual can influence or bring about the desired outcomes). Hungerford and yolk (1990) used these variables to generate a model of responsible environmental behavior for environmental educators. Their model contains all the variables identified in the previous research, but the terms "own- ership," "empowerment," and "entry-level" were added as category descriptors indicating the relationship of the variables to IEEIA instruction. Ownership refers to a construct of factors associated with personal knowledge and affect about environmental issues. Empowerment refers to a construct of factors asso- ciated with a sense of efficacy about issue solutions. Entry-level refers to factors that could be thought of as prior knowledge and dispositions (see Figure 9-1~. This discussion reflects the attempts of environmental educators and re- searchers to understand psychological and other factors associated with respon- sible environmental behavior. These findings were used as a reference frame- work in the design of the IEEIA curriculum. Additional research was then undertaken to determine the extent to which the key variables associated with responsible environmental behavior were affected by IEEIA instruction. The following section presents these studies. RESEARCH ABOUT IEEIA Eleven studies have examined the effects of IEEIA instruction in middle- grade settings: Ramsey et al. (1981), Klingler (1982), yolk and Hungerford (1981), Ramsey (1987), Ramsey (1993), Holt (1988), Bluhm et al. (1995), Blu- hm and McBeth (1996), Withrow (1988), Simpson (1991), and Culen and yolk (2000~. All these studies reported statistically significant, positive differences in responsible environmental behavior as a result of instruction, and many reported positive increases in the associated variables. For example, Ramsey et al. (1981) compared IEEIA-based instruction with environmental awareness and control treatments in Grade 8. He reported positive results on two outcome variables, knowledge of action and responsible environmental behavior. Three years later, Ramsey conducted a followup study of the students involved in the original study. Graduate students conducted double-blind interviews with students in- volved in all three groups. The graduate students identified all the subjects

OCR for page 147
154 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES Entry-level variables Ownership Empowerment variables ~ variables Major variables Major variables Major variables Environmental sensitivity In-depth knowledge about issues Personal investment in issues and the environment Minor variables Minor variables Knowledge of ecology Androgyny Attitudes toward pollution, technology, and economics Knowledge of and skill in using environmental action strategies Locus of control (Expectancy of reinforcement) Intention to act Minor variables Knowledge of the consequences of behavior- both positive and negative Personal commitment to issue resolution In-depth knowledge about issues N S H A B E H A V 1 o R FIGURE 9-1 Major and minor variables involved in environmental citizenship behavior. participating in the IEEIA treatment and found higher levels of responsible envi- ronmental behavior in the IEEIA group, despite the absence of subsequent in- structional reinforcement during the ensuing three-year period. One variable, environmental sensitivity, was not found to be affected by IEEIA treatment in any of the studies. Environmental sensitivity focuses on attributes that provide an individual with an empathetic view of the environment. Sensitivity research (e.g., Peterson, 1982; Sward and Marcinkowski, 2000; Tan- ner, 1980) strongly indicates that environmental sensitivity is one of the major precursors to environmental behavior. It seems to develop at an early age, when individuals experience pristine outdoor settings with adults who are important to them. Thus, it would be surprising if IEEIA, a formal classroom instructional treatment, could influence environmental sensitivity. What is important for en- vironmental educators are the findings that IEEIA can foster responsible envi- ronmental behavior as well as gains in many of the allied factors.

OCR for page 147
JOHN RAMSEY AND HAROLD R. HUNGERFORD 155 In summary, research on IEEIA shows that for instruction to be effective, five elements are necessary. Students should have 1. Sound problem identification skills: They should be able to identify problems that are important to them in the communities or regions in which they live (Volk and Hungerford, 1981~. 2. A degree of environmental sensitivity: Sensitivity is critical as a precur- sor to behavior. And although it may be possible, it is not easy for the formal classroom to accomplish this (Peterson, 1982; Sward and Marcinkowski, 2000; Tanner, 1980~. 3. Issue investigation and evaluation skills: The ability to investigate and subsequently to evaluate issues runs throughout much of the research discussed in this chapter. It would be hard to tease out the precise com- ponents (in a research sense), but we know that students must be able to effectively evaluate important issues before they can make intelligent decisions about what to do about them. It also appears that a key element in the concept of ownership is personal involvement by students in issues under investigation (Sia et al., 1985/1986; Hines, 1986/1987; Marcinkowski, 2000; Ramsey, 1987, 2000; Ramsey et al., 1981~. 4. Knowledge of and perceived skill in the use of citizenship action strate- gies: These skills include persuasion, political action, consumerism and the variables show up over and over again in one form or another in a great preponderance of the research discussed here. Also, these variables may well be the easiest to deal with in the classroom. How valuable they would be in and of themselves, however, without the framework of issue investigation, is unclear. It is hypothesized that there is a synergistic effect here, and the Klingler (1982) research indicates rather strongly that both are needed (Sia et al., 1985/1986; Hines et al., 1986/1987; Marcinkowski, 2000; Ramsey, 1993, 2000; Ramsey et al., 1981~. 5. An internal locus of control: Locus of control is a key element in the concept of empowerment. Knowledge of action strategies without a con- comitant feeling that the action will result in something positive probably won't get the job done. So opportunities must be provided that give students a feeling of success (even though we know that success is not met at every turn in citizenship roles). The teacher is a powerful force in helping students make good citizenship decisions, helping them find suc- cess on one hand and salving their defeats on the other (Sia et al., 1985/ 1986; Hines et al., 1986/1987; Marcinkowski, 2000~. In the future, other researchers may find that variables left out of the list above should have been included. It may be that other variables that show signif- icant implications may operate only with certain populations under certain con- ditions. And some may be related to the ones listed above, such as knowledge of

OCR for page 147
156 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES issues, verbal commitment to take action, beliefs about and attitudes toward pollution and technology, a sense of personal commitment, and attitudes toward economics. SOME SUGGESTIONS It is important to remember that environmental sensitivity needs to be initi- ated at an early age. Because this is a difficult attribute for the formal classroom situation to influence, it may be the most difficult to achieve. Classroom teach- ers can't turn learners into family campers, trappers, hunters, fishers, hikers, and people associated with other sensitivity-building avocations. Of course, the school can sponsor outdoor activities, but can it provide them in a dimension designed specifically to promote sensitivity? Remember, the outdoor activities reported by sensitive individuals focus largely on long-term experiences in rela- tively pristine environments. And these activities are done either on an individ- ual basis or with one or two close associates. The class field trip may not be an appropriate vehicle. However, it may be possible for the school to accommodate some of these experiences by planning activities that take place in relatively small groups and in relatively pristine environments at times that can maximize at least a modicum of awe and wonder, that is, sincere appreciation. And there must be many such experiences. Perhaps the best opportunity that the school has for achieving sensitivity is to combine high-quality outdoor activities with high-quality role models. Teach- ers should themselves demonstrate a high level of sensitivity, be able to commu- nicate this sensitivity to learners, and be willing to lead students to aesthetic environmental experiences via books, television, and other media, along with outdoor experiences. Beyond sensitivity, a number of behavior-related attributes can be influ- enced by planning for instruction that eventually involves learners in the investi- gation and resolution of issues. Young children can receive instruction on envi- ronmental issues through what is called the extended case study. The traditional case study deals with issues at a basic level of awareness. The extended case study is divided into five components: 1. A carefully selected issue topic around which a case study can be devel- oped, such as municipal solid waste disposal, a locally endangered spe- cies, land use management in the community/region, air/water/aesthetic pollution, loss of wetlands, forest fire management, preservation of eco- logically important plant/animal communities, and population growth; 2. Science content, which serves as prerequisite knowledge to understand- ing the scientific nature of a chosen issue; 3. Issue awareness, which focuses on the anatomy of that i' ssue (the players

OCR for page 147
JOHN RAMSEY AND HAROLD R. HUNGERFORD 157 involved and their positions, beliefs, and values), the history of the issue, and possible solutions and impediments to them; 4. Some aspect of issue investigation, which gets learners involved in data collection regarding that issue (e.g., surveys, questionnaires, opinion- naires, interviews with key players), and 5. Citizenship skills (strategies such as political action and consumerism) that can be used to help resolve the issue coupled with an action plan that is developed cooperatively by the students and teachers and implemented if desired. Older students, middle school and higher, should receive both case study instruction (at a more sophisticated level) and IEEIA instruction. With this strategy, teachers guide students through an introduction to issues, identifying problems, analyzing issues, using primary and secondary sources to obtain infor- mation about issues, recording and interpreting collected data, and demonstrat- ing citizenship strategies used in society for the remediation of issues. Major activities in this strategy include allowing the students to choose an issue of interest, guiding them in investigating and evaluating it, and reporting the find- ings to peers. The issue investigation is followed by the development of an action plan for helping to remediate that issue; it can be implemented or not, depending on the attitude of the student and judgment of the teacher. It should be stressed that behavior-directed instruction needs to be articulat- ed across grade levels. There is some evidence (not reported in this chapter) that the behaviors sought will tend to erode unless there is periodic reinforcement across grade levels. This erosion is not complete, but students, as they grow older and receive no reinforcement, tend to back away from citizenship behavior as they lose teacher support and a social support system. Similarly, the skills associated with responsible citizenship behavior should be developed across sub- ject areas with a number of content specialists (such as science, social studies, language arts, and home economics) working cooperatively using a team-teach- ing/infusion approach. Whether the school should fulfill the role of change agent in society depends entirely on the perspectives held by those making instructional decisions. How- ever, many educators firmly believe that "teaching about something" will influ- ence behavior. If this were absolutely true, then everyone would vote; no one would contract a venereal disease; everyone would be scientifically literate; the average citizen would love classical literature; man's inhumanity to man would be diminished or absent; no teenager would have an unwanted pregnancy; all laws would be respected; no animals or plants would be endangered; and people would not smoke. The same is probably true for citizenship responsibility re- garding the environment. Environmental educators have long argued for the importance of making people aware of environmental issues. But researchers

OCR for page 147
158 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES have known for a long time that this assumption is faulty (see Schultz, this volume, Chapter 4~. Needless to say, what people know is important. Yet knowing will not provide the learner with what we refer to as ownership and empowerment. For learners to become actively involved in issue investigation and evaluation as well as citizenship behavior outside school, it is rather clear that they must own the issues on which they focus and be empowered to do something about them. Instruction for the elements of ownership and empowerment is not tradition- ally part of the teacher's repertoire for instruction. This is noted to point out that teacher training has failed in its responsibility to give teachers the skills and motivation they need to make necessary instructional changes. And these in- structional skills are not easy ones to come by. Our experiences in training teachers suggest that acquiring them takes time. At the very least, training necessitates a modification of philosophy, the acquisition of a wide variety of skills (many of which are foreign to most teachers), practice in the use of these skills and the methods associated with them, and help in learning how to evalu- ate students for grading purposes. Changing a pattern of inadequate teacher education is beyond the purview of this chapter. Those who wish to see changes take place must consider how to make changes happen, both in the classroom and in students' lives. In a sense, we need to consider dual dimensions: attitude changes and skill acquisition on the parts of both teachers and students. The question then becomes how to give teachers and students both ownership and empowerment, its dual dimensions. REFERENCES Bluhm, W., H. Hungerford, W. McBeth, and T. yolk 1995 The middle school report: A final report on the development and pilot assessment of the Middle School Environmental Literacy Assessment Instrument. In Environmental Lit- eracy/Needs Assessment Project: Assessing Environmental Literacy of Students and Environmental Education Needs of Teachers: Final Reports for 1993-1995, R. Wilkie, ed. Stevens Point: University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point. Bluhm, W., and W. McBeth 1996 Evaluation Report for Investigating and Evaluating Environmental Issues and Actions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Culen, G., and T. yolk 2000 Effects of an extended case study on environmental behavior and associated variables in seventh and eighth grade students. Journal of Environmental Education 31:9-15. Disinger, J.F. 1983 Environmental Education's Definitional Problems. No. 2. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clear- inghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education. Disinger, J.F., and M. Monroe 1994 Defining Environmental Education. (EE Toolbox). Ann Arbor, MI: Consortium for Environmental Education and Training.

OCR for page 147
JOHN RAMSEY AND HAROLD R. HUNGERFORD 159 Harvey, G.D. 1977 Environmental education: A delineation of substantive structure. Dissertation Abstracts International 38:611-A. Hines, J.M., H.R. Hungerford, and A.N. Tomera 1986 Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta- /87 analysis. Journal of Environmental Education 18:1-8. Holt, J.G. 1988 Study of the Effects of Characteristics Associated with Environmental Behavior in Non- gifted Eighth Grade Students Issue Investigation and Action Training. Unpublished research paper, Southern minois University at Carbondale. Hungerford, H.R., R.B. Peyton, J. Ramsey, and T.V. yolk 1996 Investigating and Evaluating Environmental Issues and Actions: Skill Development Modules. Champaign, IL: Stipes. Hungerford, H.R., and T. yolk 1990 Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environ- mental Education, 21 :8-21. Kirk, M., R. Wilkie, and A. Ruskey 1993 Survey of the status of state-level environmental education in the U.S. Journal of Environmental Education, 29:9-16. Klingler, G. 1982 Effect of an Instructional Sequence on the Environmental Action Skills of a Sample of Southern Illinois Eighth Graders. Unpublished research paper, Southern Illinois Uni- versity at Carbondale. Lierman, R. 1995 Predicting Responsible Environmental Behavior Through the Secondary Environmental Literacy Instrument: A Secondary Analysis. Unpublished master's report, Florida Insti- tute of Technology. Marcinkowski, T.J. 2000 Predictors of environmental behavior: A review of three dissertation studies. In Essen- tial Readings in Environmental Education. H.R. Hungerford et al., eds. Champaign, IL: Stipes. North American Association for Environmental Education 1999a Excellence in Environmental Education: Guidelines for Learning (K-12). Washington, DC: North American Association for Environmental Education. l999b Environmental Education Materials: Guidelines For Excellence. Washington, DC: North American Association for Environmental Education. Peterson, N.J. 1982 Developmental Variables Affecting Environmental Sensitivity in Professional Environmen- tal Educators. Unpublished master's thesis, Southern minois University at Carbondale. Ramsey, J. 1987 Study of the Effects of Issue Investigation and Action Training on Characteristics Asso- ciated with Environmental Behavior in Seventh Grade Students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. 1993 Effects of issue investigation and action training on eighth-grade students' environmen- tal behavior. Journal of Environmental Education 24:31-36. 2000 Comparing four environmental problem solving models. In Essential Readings in Envi- ronmental Education, H.R. Hungerford et al., eds. Champaign, IL: Stipes. Ramsey, J., H.R. Hungerford, and A.N. Tomera 1981 Effects of environmental action and environmental case study instruction on the overt environmental behavior of eighth grade students. Journal of Environmental Education 13:24-29.

OCR for page 147
160 PERSPECTIVES ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES Sia, A.P., H.R. Hungerford, and A.N. Tomera 1985/ Selected predictors of responsible environmental behavior: An analysis. Journal of 1986 Environmental Education 17:31-40. Simmons, D. Simpson, P. 1991 Effects of Extended Case Study Instruction on Citizenship Behavior and Associated Variables in Fifth and Sixth Grade Students. Unpublished dissertation, Southern Illi- nois University at Carbondale. Sivek, D., and H. Hungerford 2000 Are we meeting the goal of responsible environmental behavior? In Essential Readings in Environmental Education, H.R. Hungerford et al., eds. Champaign, IL: Stipes. Stapp, W.B. 1989/ Predictors of responsible behavior in members of three Wisconsin conservation organ 1990 cations. The Journal of Environmental Education 21(2):35-40 1969 Concept of environmental education. Environmental Education 1:30-31. Sward, D., and T. Marcinkowski 2000 Environmental sensitivity: A review of the literature, 1980- 1998. In Essential Readings in Environmental Education, H.R. Hungerford et al., eds. Champaign, IL: Stipes. Tanner, T. 1980 Significant life experiences: A new research area in environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education 11 :20-24. yolk, T.L., and H.R. Hungerford 1981 Effects of process instruction on problem identification skills in environmental educa- tion. Journal of Environmental Education 12:36-40. yolk, T., and W. McBeth 2000 Environmental literacy in the United States. Pp. 73-86 in Essential Readings in Envi- ronmental Education. H. Hungerford, ed. Champaign, IL: Stipes. Winther, A. 2000 Investigating and evaluating environmental issues and actions. In Essential Readings in Environmental Education, H.R. Hungerford et al., eds. Champaign, IL: Stipes. Withrow, V. 1988 Effects of an Issue-oriented Case Study on Fifth and Sixth Students' Knowledge and Citizen Action. Unpublished master's research paper, Southern minois University at Carbondale. Zelezny, L. 2000 Educational interventions that improve environmental behaviors: A meta-analysis. In Essential Readings in Environmental Education, H.R. Hungerford et al., eds. Cham- paign, IL: Stipes.