Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Winnipeg]On: 21 August 2014, At: 07:54Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Environmental Education ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceer20
Implementing environmental educationin pre‐service teacher trainingPeter Van Petegem , An Blieck , Ingrid Imbrecht & Tom Van Houta University of Antwerp , BelgiumPublished online: 19 Jan 2007.
To cite this article: Peter Van Petegem , An Blieck , Ingrid Imbrecht & Tom Van Hout (2005)Implementing environmental education in pre‐service teacher training, Environmental EducationResearch, 11:2, 161-171, DOI: 10.1080/1350462042000338333
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350462042000338333
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Environmental Education Research,Vol. 11, No. 2, April 2005, pp. 161–171
ISSN 1350-4622 (print)/ISSN 1469-5871 (online)/05/020161–11© 2005 Taylor & Francis Group LtdDOI: 10.1080/1350462042000338333
Implementing environmental education in pre-service teacher trainingPeter Van Petegem*, An Blieck, Ingrid Imbrecht and Tom Van HoutUniversity of Antwerp, BelgiumTaylor and Francis LtdCEER11202.sgm10.1080/1350462042000338333Environmental Education Research1350-4622 (print)/1469-5871 (online)Original Article2005Taylor & Francis Ltd112000000April 2005PeterVan PetegemEDUBRON, University of AntwerpDept. of Education and Teacher TrainingUniversiteitsplein [email protected]
Implementing environmental education is a complex, unpredictable and time-consuming process,which, despite the introduction of cross-curricular attainment targets, is often ignored in Flemishteacher training curricula. This article reports on implementing environmental education in twoteacher training colleges using seven criteria: participant engagement, instructor credibility, inten-tion, functionality, self-efficacy, school climate and evaluation. One college has a long history ofcross-curricular education, whereas the other college has just started. It was found that theimplementation processes in the two teacher training institutions stagnated owing to personal andorganizational obstructions. To deal with these constraints, several recommendations are suggested.
Introduction
Recent societal developments underline the need for the advancement and support ofenvironmental education (EE). New insights in implementation strategies highlightthe necessity of an open debate on EE. Education plays a crucial role in this respect,for it has the potential to contribute in a fundamental manner to the complex learningprocesses involved in EE (Ramsey et al., 1992; Fullan, 1994).
Nearly all Flemish secondary schools provide some EE but in most cases an inte-grated, consistent approach is lacking. The introduction and development of EE atsecondary level is a long-term process in which the entire staff has to be involved. Thisis certainly not evident. Increasing public awareness requires an intensive and sustainedapproach (Van Petegem et al., 2002). At the secondary level, several projects have beeninitiated. However, at the teacher education level, EE is all but missing. Some insti-tutions of higher education do provide EE, but it is usually restricted to ecological topicsin biology and geography instruction or to an isolated project. Nevertheless, under thepressure of the cross-curricular attainment targets1 one is forced to focus on EE duringtraining. How this translates into practice, however, often goes unanswered.
*Corresponding author. University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610, Antwerp, Belgium.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
162 Peter Van Petegem et al.
In order to deal with this current demand, the research project (Blieck et al., 2000)underlying this paper focused on implementing EE in two Flemish pre-serviceteacher training programmes during 1998–2000. The implementation was part of alarger research project funded by the Belgian Government involving three universi-ties. The main focus of the interuniversity project was to increase EE in vocationalsecondary education as EE was hardly present in that area. One of the goals of thestudy was to enhance the EE awareness and competencies of future teachers. Bytaking the initiative in creative thinking and sound decision-making, they couldbecome inspired to use these skills in their teaching. In fact, teachers receiving pre-service EE preparation are found to feel more confident about using their newlydeveloped skills (Lane et al., 1995).
Frame of reference: EEI criteria
Innovations such as Environmental Education Implementation (EEI) cannot beoutlined as purely rational, cognitive operations. Processes of change are so complexthat it becomes hard to predict their outcome (Stacey, 1992; Fullan, 1994). Thepersonal experiences, motivation and commitment of the individuals involved influ-ence such processes and in particular, EEI criteria in initial teacher training. In whatfollows, we provide a frame of reference, applying general innovation theory to EEI.The criteria were obtained from a previous literature study on competencies of teach-ers in secondary societal education (Csincsak et al., 1995; Bal et al., 1996–1997). Weapplied these criteria to pre-service teacher training.
Participant engagement
Classic implementation instruments, such as setting goals, writing out plans, devel-oping methods and evaluating them, do not always suffice for EEI purposes. Bysimply following the guidelines, the chance of achieving the objective is minimal(Fullan, 1994). A very important factor is the involvement and motivation of theparticipating individuals (Lagerweij & Lagerweij-Voogt, 2004). Education profes-sionals—teachers, department heads, as well as non-teaching staff—and students arethe key players in EE. Participant engagement is needed to support the innovationfrom within and to set up realistic goals. Individual emotions and perceptions aredifficult to influence but they play a crucial role in the implementation process(Hargreaves, 1998). Insecurity and active or passive resistance may slow down theprocess. However, these feelings are to be preferred over total apathy and can be seenas necessary moments in the developing process (Daft, 1998; West, 2000).
Instructor credibility
EE should be introduced in teacher training by credible leaders. Credibility, in thissense, is derived from insight into environmental issues, an overview of the entireteacher education, in this case EE and from the analysis of the possibilities and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
Implementing environmental education in pre-service teacher training 163
bottlenecks of the implementation process. These so-called leaders are not necessarilyheads of department; teachers or non-teaching staff can also take up these positions.
Intention
One of the key factors influencing successful implementation is the extent to whichthe participants are committed to EE and the development of an environmental caresystem (ECS) at the institution. The intention to establish environmentally soundmeasures and decision-making educational objectives increases the chance of genu-ine engagement. Personal goals are fundamental for the implementation on a dailybasis.
Functionality
EE must be structurally embedded in initial teacher training programmes and curric-ula rather than being an occasional item. Therefore, it is essential to make an inven-tory of all EE-oriented initiatives. Such an inventory may unearth gaps in thecurriculum which can be filled by new items. Consequently, overlap can be avoidedand continuity supported. In addition, the sensitivities and motivation of the staffshould also be monitored as these feelings play a crucial role in the EEI process.Starting an open debate on the underlying philosophy and approach of EE is a veryimportant incentive.
The EEI approach is by definition interdisciplinary and action oriented, involvingmore than one subject area or curriculum focal point (Brinkman & Scott, 1994).Also, non-natural science disciplines must be included. Furthermore, this approachrelies heavily on collaboration between staff and students, which in turn allows forcooperative learning and professional development in EE (e.g. combining cross-curricular final objectives).
Self-efficacy
Teachers need to feel comfortable in the process of developing new cognitiveapproach frameworks (Winther et al., 2002). Experience, together with new teachercompetencies and personal mastery, may eliminate insecurity and build self-esteem(Fullan, 1994). Tutor preferences will determine the teaching format. Some preferplug-them-in teaching materials, others like to develop their own. The best way tostart is by using a familiar approach. In a later phase, when teachers feel morecomfortable with the subject, they can try out other methods.
School climate
While educators try to make a difference with individual students, they must alsostrive towards a school-wide change (Van den Berg & Vandenberghe, 1999). Theentire school population should be educated to take responsible action. As such, a
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
164 Peter Van Petegem et al.
collaborative school culture is necessary (Fullan, 1994), thus exceeding the teachereducation department and incorporating all faculties or departments of the institu-tion. An adequate instrument to provide an overall and integrative approach is anECS.
On a larger scale, the ability to work in a network of cross-institutional partnershipsbetween colleges, school communities, and social and business agencies can offerimportant support for the participants.
Evaluation
A successful innovation requires a regular review of the process. Problems areendemic and need to be solved (Fullan, 1994). Inquiries must be made to checkwhether or not the proposed goals have been achieved. Evaluation allows for processadjustments and continuous action. It makes the EEI clearer to the participants andprovides a motive for engagement through the accomplished initiatives (Van Velzenet al., 1985).
Two case studies
As mentioned in the introduction, one of the goals of the research project was toenhance the EE awareness and skills of future teachers. On that account, we drafteda workbook on EE in pre-service teacher training (Blieck & Imbrecht, 2000). Thedraft contained methods, activities and tips on EE and EEI. Consequently, two casecolleges providing vocational teacher training were asked to try out the draft. In orderto do so the EEI process had to be initiated in both colleges. The two institutions wereintensively screened using interviews, questionnaires and focus-group discussions.The proceeding implementation processes were monitored through participatoryobservation.
First we describe the situation in the colleges prior to our involvement through theresearch project. Then the implementation process is outlined, based on the sevenEEI criteria. As the processes ran parallel in both colleges, they are presentedtogether.
Situation
College A. This teacher training college had no history of EE or cross-curriculartraining. Environmental topics were presented occasionally in biology, geography orreligion as isolated subjects and were up to the individual teachers. Owing to arecent merger and the upcoming move to another campus, teachers hardly knewone another and they experienced environmentally sound measures in the oldbuildings as useless. The new buildings, however, provided a chance to start withan ECS. Although most teacher trainers did not feel involved in EE, it was theiropinion that everyone, not only the biology and geography teachers, should supportit.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
Implementing environmental education in pre-service teacher training 165
College B. Cross-curricular objectives were integrated in the curriculum as a separatecourse and a residential cross-curricular teaching practice. This college had a longtradition of environmental and cross-curricular education. There was some cross-level continuity but this could be improved. Owing to the division into a specificcourse, the teachers that were not involved in this course gave low priority to EE.They felt it was the responsibility of the EE teachers because it was part of their job:‘They get paid for it’. Therefore, the environment and environmentally sound atti-tudes obtained low priority during classes. The unfortunate result was that the skillsand knowledge acquired during the cross-curricular course and teaching exerciseswere not put into practice elsewhere.
Implementation process
Taking into account the different criteria mentioned above, we decided not to steerthe implementation process ourselves. Instead, we asked the department heads toappoint two credible lecturers in each college to set things up on campus. The fourlecturers were funded by the research project for their extra assignments. Their primarytasks according to the workbook (Blieck & Imbrecht, 2000) involved starting up anEE workgroup, organising a workshop to motivate all participants and introducing anECS. Furthermore, a permanent orientation and/or introduction of EE in the curric-ulum was prioritised. Formal and informal sessions with the four teachers were orga-nised to map the present state and to make arrangements concerning the EEI process.
Participant engagement
To enhance the involvement of the staff and to organise forthcoming activities, settingup an EE workgroup in each college was essential. In both institutions, the appointedteachers talked to their colleagues in order to motivate them to join the workgroup,but had little success. Although teachers indicated that everyone should be involved,they really meant everyone but themselves. They believed EE should be dealt with inbiology and geography instruction or in a separate course by the respective teachers.Overall, teachers in colleges A and B felt stressed out, owing to the introduction ofmore and more new educational requirements on top of the subject matter in theirown field. Moreover, teachers were hesitant for reasons of uncertainty about what wasto be expected of them. Therefore, the next step in the EEI process was to organisetwo workshops, one on each campus. The main focus of each workshop was a presen-tation by the researchers on the present state of EE in the college and a discussionamong the staff on what could be done about EE on campus. The workshops turnedout to be very important incentives in the implementation processes running in thetwo teacher training colleges. Teachers and non-teaching staff were able to talk abouttheir constraints and about possible solutions. Key questions about the future line ofpolicy were addressed but also other issues such as student litter. The debateincreased the staff’s involvement and set off formal discussions. EE became a hottopic in the lobby.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
166 Peter Van Petegem et al.
Instructor credibility
Each department head appointed two teachers to organise the upcoming EE imple-mentation. They were selected on grounds of motivation and credibility and werepaid by the research project. The four teachers enjoyed the respect of their colleaguesand had experience in the matter. Nevertheless, the influence they had on their fellowteachers concerning EE was less than could be expected, both in College A as inCollege B. This was probably due to the fact that the four teachers were used toworking alone without much help from their colleagues. Besides, they had EE in theirjob description unlike the other educators. Extra efforts concerning EE were auto-matically passed on to the ‘core’ group, as West calls it (2000).
Intention
A small majority of the tutors indicated that EE should be part of pre-service teachereducation. In order to enhance their intention and engagement, the four appointedteachers set up a declaration on their own initiative. They asked the other teachers tosign it during the workshops in both institutions. In this document educatorssubscribed to motivating all participants, building an ECS and including EE in thecurriculum. The following activities were planned according to the declaration:setting up an EE workgroup, stimulating student involvement in EE programmes,providing in-service training for the staff, supporting vision and attitude building andmanaging a budget. In both colleges the declaration was signed by the participantsbut not by the other teachers nor by the head of department. The participantsprobably felt obliged to sign whereas the others needed more time to think it over.The declaration came too soon in the process. It would have been better to present itafter finishing the EE project on campus (see ‘Functionality’) when teachers could bemotivated more easily by the results of their work.
Functionality
College A organised an EE project on campus emphasising team-building and reflec-tive decision-making activities. Additionally, they worked out several environmentallysound measures such as using green cleaning products and cutting down on energyconsumption. Furthermore, students were urged to use cross-curricular objectives intheir teaching practice. In College B, the cross-curricular course and teaching prac-tices continued. A set of new waste measures was introduced and the intentionincreased to enlarge the green belt. EEI seemed to run very well in both colleges. Onthe collaboration level, however, the processes in the colleges stagnated. The work-groups were established on paper but did not find the time to meet formally.Unplanned factors interfered which arose from the fusions of the department withother colleges. Teachers believed they had too many extra tasks already and limitedcourse time. Moreover, they indicated a lack of knowledge and experience with EEand therefore felt constricted in their instruction. The EEI process was run by a
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
Implementing environmental education in pre-service teacher training 167
handful of leaders. These were the ‘innovators’ eager to try out a new approach whilethe others took on a ‘wait-and-see’ attitude (West, 2000; Stevens, 2004).
To deal with this infrequent collaboration, the younger teachers created a frame-work for future debate. They had a more open mind about setting up meetings toreach a consensus than senior teachers. Interdepartmental debate about EE issueswas still inexistent, though. But awareness of the necessity to deal with the topic wasrising, especially since the designated ECS needed considerations on the interdepart-mental level.
Self-efficacy
In order to manage the feelings of inexperience and incompetence mentioned above,some lecturers in both colleges tried out the methods, activities and tips on EE andEEI from the workbook (Blieck & Imbrecht, 2000). It offers plug-them-in material,improving accessibility and includes several educational references. The book wasfound to be very useful by these teachers as a basis for further elaboration. They feltsupported in developing new EE competencies.
School climate
Despite their passive attitude and fear of a higher workload, most teachers supportedthe idea of EE and they vowed to change their lifestyles. Small initiatives were beinglaunched such as using paper on both sides and turning off lights when leaving theclassroom. Teachers felt responsible to set an example, although they second-guessedthe real impact they had on their students.
Evaluation
The activities such as the EE project (College A), the environmental courses (CollegeB) and the workshops were evaluated by both students and teachers who organisedthese activities. The results were used to adjust the continuous actions for the follow-ing years. This evaluation needs to be continued in order to stimulate the implemen-tation process and motivate all participants. An emphasis on the efforts and positiveresults is a very important incentive for present and future engagement of teachers aswell as students.
Discussion
From two different, originally opposite, situations, the implementation of EE evolvedsimilarly in the two case studies. One would expect that the process in College B, witha long tradition of EE, would proceed faster and more efficiently owing to moreexperience. Nevertheless, the implementation in the two teacher training collegesdeveloped in a similar way. Organising an EE project involving only a small numberof teachers and introducing some minor environmental measures did not cause great
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
168 Peter Van Petegem et al.
obstruction. The most difficult constraint seemed to be the motivation of all theteachers as a team. Most of them did not feel committed to action since they weretrained to work autonomously. Moreover, they indicated a lack of knowledge andreluctance to venture into uncertain fields and go beyond their lesson plans. Nothaving adequate background information or training has been found to be a majorreason for not providing EE (Lane & Wilke, 1994; Lane et al., 1995). Teachers didnot come to grips with the innovative methodologies and therefore did not integratethem in their instruction (Joyce & Showers, 1988). This resulted in a feeling of workoverload owing to the need to implement multiple innovations and policies at thesame time. Teachers regarded EE as a supplement in addition to the overabundanceof topics in the syllabus. In particular, the non-science teachers, with little EE expe-rience, did not feel responsible as EE was understood to be a task of science teachers(Lane & Wilke, 1994; Kyburz-Graber & Rigendinger, 1997) and unrelated to theirown discipline (Lane et al., 1995). So finally, EEI stagnated not because of reasonsconcerning EE itself but owing to a lack of shared decision-making and open-mindedness for innovative didactic competencies. ‘Re-culturing’ and extra commu-nication were necessary for people to see the benefits and possibilities of EEI (Daft,1998; West, 2000). Effective practices showing how EE could be integrated in dailyinstruction were needed.
In what follows, we suggest a number of recommendations for dealing with theprevious constraints.
Staff development is compulsory for any innovation, enabling teachers to work onnew teaching technologies, personal vision-building and cooperation. Learning aboutcommunication, values, critical thinking and interactive work forms is also important.A primary focus needs to be on awareness and interest raising (Brinkman & Scott,1994). This means accentuating the positive results and sustaining enthusiasm andongoing teacher commitment (Louis, 1998; West, 2000). Individual emotions andidentities must be addressed as they are fundamental for teacher commitment(Hargreaves, 1998; Day, 2002; Van den Berg, 2002). Teachers require guidance tocome to terms with their workload and to relieve some of their psychological discom-fort (Hargreaves & Fullan, 1992). The emphasis should be on new approach insightsin which EE does not come on top of the syllabus but is integrated into daily practicewhere teachers work together in a cooperative school-wide structure.
Staff development will not only affect the skill repertoire of the teachers but willalso benefit the students (Joyce & Showers, 1988). Cross-curricular teamwork mustbe an important topic in teacher training. Student teachers should be able to worktogether in a team with their mentors and be involved in planning, implementing andevaluating the projects. This will enhance their commitment and reflection capacitiesand encourage them to build the experience into their own professional development(Brinkman & Scott, 1994). Competence-building and collaboration must be encour-aged (Fullan, 1994). Specific activities in collaboration with students, such as organ-ising debates, making an inventory of the environmental constraints on campus andfinding solutions, can motivate others to join in. This stimulation needs to berepeated over the years as teachers and students come and go.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
Implementing environmental education in pre-service teacher training 169
To organise staff development and cooperation facilities, strong leadership isneeded. It is the department heads’ responsibility to manage resources like money,time, materials, assistance and training. Teachers need encouragement and praisealongside administrative support and adequate teacher planning time (May, 2000).To prevent statements like ‘it is their job, not ours’, EE could be included in the jobdescription of all teachers.
Finally, on a wider scale, it is important for educators to be able to participate inthe policy-making of EE and to be given the chance to follow innovations and evolu-tions from up close. Also, an open dialogue between parents, administrators, otherenvironmental educators and the local community should be made possible tonurture conditions that advance EE opportunities.
It is evident that EEI in initial teacher training is a long-lasting effort. ‘Condi-tions of uncertainty, learning, anxiety, difficulties and the fear of the unknown areintrinsic to all change processes, especially at the early stages’ (Fullan, 1994, p. 25).Setting up an innovation needs a long period of time to get used to the changingsettings and to find consensus. It is a matter of patience and persistence (Van derWolf & Roede, 1997).
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank the staff of the two teacher training colleges whose participa-tion made this research possible. Our appreciation also goes to Koos Kortland of theUniversity of Utrecht for his comments on this paper.
Note
1. Flemish curricula discern seven cross-curricular attainment targets at secondary level: environ-mental education, health education, social skills, citizenship education, learning to learn,expressive-creative education (only in the second and third stages) and technical-technologicaleducation (only for general—not vocational—secondary education in the second and thirdstages).
Notes on contributors
Peter Van Petegem leads the ‘EduBROn’ research group at the University ofAntwerp, Belgium (www.edubron.be). He is involved in a number of relevantdomains in the field of educational practice and his research has led to the devel-opment of innovative instruments and methodologies. He is also active in thedevelopment cooperation domain concerning EE. He promoted this researchproject.
An Blieck and Ingrid Imbrecht are ‘EduBROn’ research assistants at the Universityof Antwerp, Belgium. They both received a Master’s degree in biology and areinvolved in several educational and environmental research projects.
Tom Van Hout is a teaching assistant at the University of Antwerp. His researchinterests include teaching practices and methodology.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
170 Peter Van Petegem et al.
References
Bal, S., Damen, V., Stevens, V. & Van Oost, P. (1996–1997) De introductie en implementatie vanvakoverschrijdende thema’s in het secundair onderwijs: een instrument voor zelfevaluatie,Tijdschrift voor onderwijsrecht en onderwijsbeleid, 6, 383–394.
Blieck, A. & Imbrecht, I. (2000) Werkboek Natuur- en Milieueducatie in de lerarenopleiding(Antwerp, UIA).
Blieck, A., Imbrecht, I., De Feyter, P., Damen, V. & Van Petegem, P. (2000) Onderzoek naar demogelijkheden voor inbedding van NME voor het BSO en TSO in de lerarenopleiding en in denascholing (Antwerp, UIA).
Brinkman, F. G. & Scott, W. A. H. (1994) Environmental Education into initial teacher education inEurope. ‘The state of the art.’ Atee Cahiers,no. 8 (Brussels, Association of Teacher Education inEurope).
Csincsak, M., Blieck, A., Van Oost, P. & Damen, V. (1995) Welke kennis en vaardigheden mogenvan de ‘leraar secundair onderwijs – nieuwe stijl’ verwacht worden ten aanzien van de verschillendemaatschappelijke educaties? Een interdisciplinair onderzoek, F.C.F.O.-rapport (Gent, Rug).
Daft, R. L. (1998) Organizational theory and design (6th edn) (St. Paul, Minnesota, West Publishing).Day, C. (2002) School reform and transitions in teacher professionalism and identity, International
Journal of Educational Research, 37(8), 677–692.Fullan, M. (1994) Change forces: probing the depths of educational reform (London, Falmer Press).Hargreaves, A. (1998) The emotional practice of teaching, Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(8),
835–854.Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (1992) Understanding teacher development (London, Cassell).Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1988) Student achievement through staff development (New York, Longman).Kyburz-Graber, R. & Rigendinger, L. (1997) A socio-ecological approach to interdisciplinary
environmental education in senior high schools, Environmental Education Research, 3(1),17–28.
Lagerweij, N. & Lagerweij-Voogt, J. (2004) Anders kijken. De dynamiek van een eeuw onderwijs-verandering (Antwerp/Apeldoorn, Garant).
Lane, J. & Wilke, R. (1994) Environmental education in Wisconsin: a teacher survey, The Journalof Environmental Education, 25(4), 9–17.
Lane, J., Wilke, R., Champeau, R. & Shivek, D. (1995) Strengths and weaknesses of teacher envi-ronmental education preparation in Wisconsin, The Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1),36–45.
Louis, K. S. (1998) Effects of teacher quality of work life in secondary schools on commitmentand sense of efficacy, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(1), 1–27.
May, T. S. (2000) Elements of success in environmental education through practitioner eyes, TheJournal of Environmental Education, 31(3), 4–11.
Ramsey, J. M., Hungerford, J. R. & Volk, T. L. (1992) Environmental education in the K-12curriculum: finding a niche, The Journal of Environmental Education, 23(2), 35–45.
Stacey, R. (1992) Managing the unknowable (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass).Stevens, R. J. (2004) Why do educational innovations come and go? What do we know? What can
we do? Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(4), 389–396.Van den Berg, R. (2002) Teachers’ meanings regarding educational practice, Review of Educational
Research, 72(4), 577–625.Van den Berg, R. & Vandenberghe, R. (1999) Succesvol leiding geven aan onderwijsinnovaties. Inves-
teren in mensen (Alphen aan den Rijn, Samsom).Van der Wolf, K. & Roude, E. (1997) Opstaan voor onderwijsvernieuwing (Groningen, Wolters-
Noordhoff).Van Petegem, P., Imbrecht, I., Blieck, A. & De Feyter, P. (2002) Natuur- en milieueducatie in de
lerarenopleiding. Het belang van waardenvorming, Impuls voor onderwijsbegeleiding, 32(4),180–189.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
Implementing environmental education in pre-service teacher training 171
Van Velzen, W. G., Miles, M. B., Ekholm, M., Hameyer, U. & Robin, D. (1985) Making schoolimprovement work. A conceptual guide to practice (Leuven/Amersfoort, Acco).
West, M. (2000) Supporting school improvement: observations on the inside, reflections from theoutside, School Leadership and Management, 20(1), 43–60.
Winther, A. A., Volk, T. L. & Schrock, S. A. (2002) Teacher decision making in the 1st year ofimplementation of an issues-based environmental education program: a qualitative study, TheJournal of Environmental Education, 33(3), 27–33.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f W
inni
peg]
at 0
7:54
21
Aug
ust 2
014
