Connecting Urban Youth with their Environment: The Impact of an Urban Ecology Course on Student Content Knowledge, Environmental Attitudes and Responsible Behaviors

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Erin A. Hashimoto-Martell (1) hashimer@bc.edu
  Katherine L. McNeill (1)
  Emily M. Hoffman (2)
• 关键词：Ecological education &#8211 ; Environmental education &#8211 ; Environmental literacy &#8211 ; Informal science education &#8211 ; Middle school &#8211 ; Urban ecology &#8211 ; Urban youth
• 刊名：Research in Science Education
• 出版年：2012
• 出版时间：October 2012
• 年：2012
• 卷：42
• 期：5
• 页码：1007-1026
• 全文大小：701.0 KB
• 参考文献：1. Bouillion, L. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school-community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878–898.
  2. Bowers, C. A. (2001). Educating for eco-justice and community. University of Georgia Press.
  3. Bowers, C. A., Newman, V., Brawdy, P., & Egan, R. (2001). Toward an eco-justice pedagogy. Educational Studies, 32(4), 401–452.
  4. Brulle, R. J., & Pellow, D. N. (2006). Environmental justice: Human health and environmental inequalities. Annual Review of Public Health, 27, 103–124.
  5. Calabrese Barton, A. (2007). Science learning in urban settings. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 319–343). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  6. Calabrese Barton, A. (2008). Feminisms and a world not yet: Science with and for social justice. In W.-M. Roth & K. Tobin (Eds.), The world of science education: Handbook of research in North America. Rotterdam: SensePublishers.
  7. Corburn, J. (2005). Street science: Community knowledge and environmental health justice. Cambridge: MIT.
  8. Cronin-Jones, L. L. (2000). The Effectiveness of schoolyards as sites for elementary science instruction. School Science and Mathematics, 100(4), 203–211.
  9. Furman, G. C., & Gruenewald, D. A. (2004). Expanding the landscape of social justice: A critical ecological analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 47.
  10. Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 3.
  11. Haluza-Delay, R. (2001). Nothing here to care about: Participant constructions of nature following a 12-day wilderness program. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 43–48.
  12. Hart, P. (2007). Environmental education. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 689–726). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  13. Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1986). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8.
  14. Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–22.
  15. Jenkins, E. W., & Pell, R. G. (2006). “Me and the environmental challenges”: A survey of English secondary school students’ attitudes towards the environment. International Journal of Science Education, 28(7), 765–780.
  16. 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.
  17. League, M. B. (1997). Leadership grows in the schoolyard. Science and Children, 34(6), 18–21.
  18. Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2005). ‘Loveable’ mammals and ‘lifeless’ plants: How children’s interest in common local organisms can be enhanced through observation of nature. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 655–677.
  19. Lisowski, M., & Disinger, J. F. (1991). The effect of field-based instruction on student understandings of ecological concepts. Journal of Environmental Education, 23(1), 19–23.
  20. Lutts, R. H. (1985). Place, home and story in environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(1), 37–41.
  21. Martin, S. C. (2003). The influence of outdoor schoolyard experiences on students’ environmental knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and comfort levels. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15(2), 51–64.
  22. Matthews, B. E. (1992). Does outdoor and environmental education have a role in multicultural education? Cortland: Coalition for Education in the Outdoors.
  23. Meyers, I. B. (1908). Field-work and nature-study. Part I. The pedagogical aspect. The Elementary School Teacher, 8(5), 225–232.
  24. Milton, B., Cleveland, E., & Bennett-Gates, D. (1995). Changing perceptions of nature, self, and others: A report on a park/school program. Journal of Environmental Education, 26(3), 32–39.
  25. Moseley, E. L. (1925). Some suggestions for outdoor science teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 26(1), 58–66.
  26. North American Association for Environmental Education. (2004). Excellence in environmental education: Guidelines for learning (PreK-12). Rock Spring: NAAEE.
  27. Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463–1488.
  28. Smith, G. A., & Williams, D. R. (1999). Ecological education in action. Lincoln: State University of New York Press.
  29. Sobel, D. (1996). Beyond ecophobia: Reclaiming the heart in nature education. Great Barrington: The Orion Society and The Myrin Institute.
• 作者单位：1. Boston College, Lynch School of Education, Campion Hall, 140 Commonwealth Avenue, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467, USA2. Urban Ecology Institute, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA
• ISSN：1573-1898

文摘

This study explores the impact of an urban ecology program on participating middle school students’ understanding of science and pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors. We gathered pre and post survey data from four classes and found significant gains in scientific knowledge, but no significant changes in student beliefs regarding the environment. We interviewed 12 students to better understand their beliefs. Although student responses showed they had learned discrete content knowledge, they lacked any ecological understanding of the environment and had mixed perceptions of the course’s relevance in their lives. Students reported doing pro-environmental behaviors, but overwhelmingly contributed such actions to influences other than the urban ecology course. Analyses indicated a disconnect between the course, the environment, and the impact on the students’ lives. Consequently, this suggests the importance of recognizing the implications of context, culture, and identity development of urban youth. Perhaps by providing explicit connections and skills in urban environmental programs through engaging students in environmental scientific investigations that stem from their own issues and questions can increase student engagement, motivation, and self-efficacy of environmental issues.