Learning experiences that produce environmentally active and informed minds

N

Li

Ga

b

a

ARA

Ketnsp

1

emOstiahtpeom

h1

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelJAS-160; No. of Pages 7

NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences

jo ur nal homepage: www.elsev ier .co m/locate /n jas

earning experiences that produce environmentally active andnformed minds

regor Torkara,b,∗

University of Nova Gorica, Laboratory for Environmental Research, Vipavska 13, 5000 Nova Gorica, SloveniaUniversity of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploscad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:eceived 14 June 2012ccepted 4 March 2014

eywords:nvironmental educationeacheratureignificant life experiencesarticipation

a b s t r a c t

This study provides evidence of the significant life experiences that have influenced teachers’ attitudestowards the environment and present their teaching practices within environmental education. Threegroups of teachers (preschool, primary school and biology), working in preschools and in nine-year longcompulsory basic schools in Slovenia completed questionnaires. Findings were generalised against bodiesof research discussing significant life experiences and recomendations concerning environmental educa-tion improvement. Enjoyment of the outdoors, especially in the childhood, attitudes of parents, life in thecountryside, experiences with animals and plants, solitude of remote places, education and experiencingnegative environmental changes, all had an influence on the teachers’ care for nature. Experiences withorganisms and education were more influential life experiences for biology teachers then for preschoolor primary school teachers. Teachers emphasised four teaching practices important for environmentaleducation: direct experience of nature, discussions about environmental problems, active participationof students in environmental activities and the importance of teachers as role models. The importance ofstudent’s inter-active participation in environmental activities has been under-emphasized, particularly
among biology teachers. They have encouraged them to analyze and discuss environmental problemsrather than to empower them in the extension of collective pro-environmental actions, which wouldprovide them with necessary experiences in governing processes enabling them to take an active societalrole.
© 2014 Royal Netherlands Society for Agricultural Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights

. Introduction

Understanding the way learning occurs and what stimulatesnvironmental behaviour is as important as environmental infor-ation [1]. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Culturalrganization (UNESCO) workshop in Belgrade (1975) produced a

tatement of environmental education aims, which still defineshe field mainstream [2]. “The goal of environmental educations to develop a world population that is aware of, and concernedbout, the environment and its associated problems, and whichas the knowledge, skills, attitudes, motivations, and commitmento work individually and collectively toward solutions of currentroblems and prevention of new ones.” The ultimate objective of

Please cite this article in press as: G. Torkar, Learning experiences thWageningen J. Life Sci. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.0

nvironmental education is to encourage actions towards the res-lution of environmental problems. If environmental education iseant to help children learn and care for the environment, then

∗ Corresponding author.E-mail address: [email protected]

ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002573-5214/© 2014 Royal Netherlands Society for Agricultural Sciences. Published by Else

reserved.

those responsible for implementing these aims (e.g. teachers) mustknow the forms of learning experience that encourage and produceactive and informed minds [3]. In order to study young people’senvironmental behaviour researchers compare behavioural out-comes from different types of environmental programmes. Anotherapproach used by reasearchers has been a retrospective, composedof research on the significant life experiences of environmentalactivists and educators.

1.1. Types of environmental education

Research reviewed demonstrated that, in order to effectivelyaddress environmental problems, different types of environmen-tal initiatives should be implemented. Stern [4], distinguishedbetween private and public environmental actions. Environmentaleducation has traditionally promoted private pro-environmental

at produce environmentally active and informed minds, NJAS -3.002

behaviour [5], where individuals consume less resourses by usingtechnological innovations (e.g., energy efficient appliences) andalternative behaviours (e.g., using public transport) or by reduc-ing consumption of resources (e.g., reduction in purchasing) [2].

vier B.V. All rights reserved.

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

www.elsevier.com/locate/njas

mailto:[email protected]

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

ING ModelN

2 rnal o

Ecnttor

ncmbfmetl(mpo[cwhs[p

1

emtfmtcesifse

tivrwotcmdmaenseaaa

ARTICLEJAS-160; No. of Pages 7

G. Torkar / NJAS - Wageningen Jou

ach individual must decide in order to change their behaviour, buthanges must also occur on a broader level in order to have a sig-ificant environmental impact. Jensen and Schnack [6] emphasisedhat environmental action is intentional and contributes directlyo solving confrontional problems (people-environment relations)r influence others to contribute to solving the problem on inter-elational questions (people-to-people relationships).

Environmental actions are most effective when people orga-ize to pressure Goverment and industry in order to act for theommon good [7]. Collective pro-environmental actions can forceajor actors, such as busineses and goverments, to take responsi-

ility for the environment and make sustainable choices availableor individuals (e.g., energy efficient cars, bikeways) [5]. Environ-

ental education should also foster young people’s interest andngagement in public issues and democratic principles in ordero effectively address environmental issues. Wals et al. [8] high-ighted this concept by dividing environmental education into:i) instrumental, which seeks to change pre-determined environ-

ental behaviours, and (ii) emancipatory, which seeks to engagearticipants in an active dialogue in order to establish individualbjectives and plans for environmental action. Similarly, Sterling9] defined intrinsic and instrumental learning in sustainable edu-ation. In doing so, Sterling added a third educational categoryhich focused on personal growth or competencies associated withealthy development and lifestyle success (e.g., social competence,ense of purpose, interest in learning) [9]. Schusler and Krasny10] reported that environmental action is a valuable context forositive adolescent development.

.2. Significant life experiences and environmental education

Environmental education ascertains the platform that knowl-dge is socially constructed, that there are cognitive, economic,oral and philosophical aspects that must be considered although

here are no certainties in theory or in practice [11]. This trans-ormation of perception also calls for dismissal of the dominant

echanistic perception of seeing the world [12]. No scienceeaching can avoid communicating messages concerning humanonceptual or interaction with nature [13]. These messages influ-nce young people’s attitudes toward nature [14]. Furthermore, theocial learning theory recognizes that people learn from observ-ng an external role model and following their lead, not merelyrom verbal interaction [15]. Teachers are aware of impressionableocial pressures to act as model citizens and that their actions helpstablish the next generational moral compass [16].

Three decades ago, Tanner [17] conducted a study that inves-igated the significant life experiences (SLEs) of conservationistsn the United States. His attempt was to understand what moti-ated them to dedicate their lives to environmental issues. Otheresearchers [e.g., 18,19, 20,21,22, 23, 24,25,26, 27] have carried onhere Tanner left regarding SLEs research. Research then focused

n the study of SLEs of environmentalist and environmental educa-ors. Key life experiences in raising environmental awareness wereonsided: (a) frequent interaction with natural and rural environ-ents; followed by (b) the influencial experiences that occurred

uring childhood, involving events within the natural environ-ent and countryside; (c) role models, particularly family members

nd teachers; and (d) educational emphasis [17,19,20,24,25]. Bajdt al. [27] compared teachers from science disciplines in Slove-ia and the UK. They found similar results; however, the secondtrongest influence among Slovenian teachers was their view on


nvironmental destruction and pollution. In addition, researcherslso highlighted the impact of membership in organisations, friendsnd peer groups, literature,the media, religious beliefs, travellingbroad and parenting.

PRESSf Life Sciences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Neal and Palmer [28] emphasize that environmental educa-tion should be core orientated and implemented into fundamentalschool subjects and related to cross-curricular themes. In acco-radance with findings from the field of significant life experiencesNeal and Plamer also point out that students should not be pre-sented only with environmental information; they should buildon their natural experiences–their personal interactions withthe environment–and the learning they thus bring from theirexperience and environmental interaction. In the Tibilisi recom-mendations [29] it was stressed that environmental education isa lifelong process, interdisciplinary and holistic, encompassing theencouragement of young people’s participation, practical activitiesand first-hand experiences, which should lead to the developmentof an environmental ethic.

Palmer et al. [25] also suggest that there is a need for establishingcomprehensive programs inclusive of the formal and informal edu-cational system. According to Palmer et al. [25], formal programsin environmental education alone are ineffective in educating chil-dren and adolescents on how to save the planet. Palmer andBirch [5] stressed the importance of informal environmental edu-cation, including communication and information, that resultsfrom living and interacting in a particular locality and commu-nity, from newspapers, television, radio, other media forms, ‘events’in an individual’s life and the wider world while interactingwith other people and the natural world. Chawla and FlandersCushing [30] reviewed four bodies of research that shed lighton promotional active care for the environment in children andadolescents. According to their review, children and adolescentsrequire personal ownership of the studied issues, choosing person-ally significant goals and integrating action for the common goodaccording to their sense of identity. They also need opportunities fordirect experience, beginning with intimately known natural areas,and extending into participation in managing projects throughtheir school and local community where they can see for them-selves how local government functions and feel that they aremaking meaningful contributions. In the course of these expe-riences, adolescents need opportunities for discussion, analyzingpublic issues together, determining shared goals, resolving conflictsand articulating strategies for overcoming challenges and achievingsuccess. During this process, children and adolescents become suc-cessful role models for each other. Seeing similar others (i.e. peers)perform successfully can raise perceived self-efficiency expecta-tions in observers and teach them effective strategies for dealingwith challenging or threatening situations [15].

1.3. Purpose and objectives

The purpose of this study was to examine Slovenian teacher’ssignificant life experiences that have influenced their environ-mental attitudes and concerns and to invastigate their teachingpractices in environmental education. Significant life experiencesand teaching practices of three different groups of teachers, foundto be the most responsible for environmental education in prescooland compulsory basic education in Slovenia, were compared. Find-ings were generalised against different bodies of research throughdiscussing significant life experiences and recommendations forenvironmental education.

2. Material and methods

Teachers were given a questionnaire questioning them about


their significant life experiences, teaching practices in environ-mental education and basic demographic questions (gender, age,teaching profession). The questionnaire format is a widely usedand useful instrument for collecting survey information [31]. The

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

ING ModelN

rnal o

rowea“aa

tsotstibteaewcbfittcds1at

tSdmn1mh

ta(soctorpcTdomlr

aowlI



esearch technique involves retrospective analysis of the mem-rable life experiences encountered by teachers. Then teachersere asked to describe teaching practices they used to develop

nvironmental awareness and responsible behaviour in childrennd adolescents. Participants were presented with open questions,Which life experiences influenced your attitudes towards nature?”nd “How do you develop young peoples’ care for the environmentnd nature?” and were asked to express themselves freely.

Based on the knowledge of the population and the purpose ofhe study a purposive sampling technique was applied. In purpo-ive samples, researchers select the sample cases to be includedn the basis of their judgment of typically or posession of the par-icular characteristics being sought and in this way build up theample that is satisfactory to their specific needs. It can be usedo access those who have in-depth knowledge about particularssues [31]. Three groups of teachers were selected into the sampleased on their teaching profession. Slovene teachers are expectedo assist children and adolescents in order to develop their knowl-dge, concern and responsible behaviour towards the environmentnd nature [32–34]. The objective was to compare significant lifexperiences and teaching practices of three groups of teachers whoere, according to the national curriculum, the most relevant tea-

hers for environmental education in prescool and compulsoryasic education in Slovenia. The three groups of teachers identi-ed were preschool teachers, primary school teachers and biologyeachers. Preschool teachers in Slovenia teach children betweenhe age of 1 and 6. In Slovenia, primary and lower secondary edu-ation are unified and called compulsory basic education, which isivided into three, three-year cycles. Primary school teachers teachtudents in the first and second three-year cycle (students aged 6-1) the majority of school subjects. Biology teachers teach biologynd/or natural science subjects at the end of the second and throughhe third three-year cycle (students aged 11-14).

Altogether 106 preschool, 111 primary school and 100 biologyeachers working in preschools and compulsory basic schools inlovenia completed the questionnaire before the predetermainedate. The sample included three male and 314 female teachers; allales were biology teachers. Gender proportions in the sample are

ormal for Slovenian schools. In the school year 2010/2011 only,9% of care and educational staff in Slovenian preschools wereales [35]. Slovenia is also one of the leading EU countries with

igh proportion of women among elementary teachers, 97.5% [36].Eleven schools and preschools were randomly selected from

he list of Slovenian basic schools and preschools providedt the webpage of Ministry of Education, Science and Sportshttp://www.mizs.gov.si/en/). First, the administration of selectedchools and kindergartens were contacted by phone to confirmr refuse their participation in the survey. In the selection pro-ess only one school refused to participate. Respondents completedhe questionnaire during regular staff meetings in their preschoolsr schools. Some respondents completed the questionnaire duringegional staff meetings and workshops for those teaching specificrofessional subjects (e.g. biology and natural science) These tea-hers meet occasionally to exchange their professional experiences.he author was present at all meetings in order to provide intro-uctory remarks concerning the purpose of the study. On someccasions, teachers completed the questionnaire at home and thenailed it to the author’s address. A stamped, self addressed enve-

ope was provided. Seventy four point four percent of teacherseturned the questionaire before a predetermained date.

Literal transcriptions of the open-ended questions were madend ideas contained in responses were coded into categories. In


rder to reduce bias two other researchers together with the authorere involved in coding the responses. Categories of significant

ife experiences were defined based upon earlier published work.deas with the same meaning were coded together. Low-frequency

PRESSf Life Sciences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 3

ideas with the same meanings as high-frequency ideas were codedtogether. For example, ideas such as “Chernobyl” or “polluted air inour town” were replaced by the coding “Negative experiences: pol-lution, degradation, radiation”. Ideas that appeared less than fivetimes or could not be coded with others were put into the cate-gory “Other”. The ideas and their frequency gave an indication ofthe meaning teachers assigned to the question. Since each partic-ipant answered the questions with more than one idea, the totalfrequency of the written ideas was unequal to the number of par-ticipants. For the second open-question some examples of ideascontained in responses were also given.

3. Results

3.1. Teachers’ significant life experiences that influence thedevelopment of their attitudes toward nature

The data regarding the responses to the open questions is pre-sented in the tables below. Table 1 represents the categorisationof the teachers’ responses about significant life experiences. Partic-ipants’ ideas contained in the responses (a total of 810) were putinto 15 different categories. Seventy-six (9.95%) ideas appeared lessthan five times or could not be coded with others and were as aresult put into category ‘Other’. Results in Table 1 indicate that par-ticipants believed parents and childhood outdoors activities werethe most influential categories. Participants often gave examplesof how parents influenced them, particularly during childhood. Alarge number of teachers made detailed reference to memorableexperiences outdoors as a child, including playing in the open air,going to the seaside and mountains, or being raised in the country-side.

The importance of other categories should not be neglected,such as current life in the countryside, recreation and sports, andexperiencing animals and plants. Looking more generally on theresults it becomes very clear that outdoor experiences were themost important for participants (categories 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 in Table 1).Among key life experiences were also role models and mentors.In addition to parents, grandparents, teachers other persons werealso mentioned (categories 1, 9, 13 in Table 1). Among frequentlymentioned categories were also ‘Negative experiences: pollution,disasters, radiation’, ‘Education’ and ‘Experience of solitude andfreedom in nature’. Some participating teachers (16 responses)reported that severe illness and personal crisis (e.g. death of a lovedone, alcoholism in the family) have changed their lives. They foundcomfort and personal meaning in natural areas.

Among the preschool, primary school and biology teachers therewere some considerable differences in significant life experiences.Category ‘Experience of animals and plants’ was much more fre-quently mentioned by biology teachers (38%) then by preschool(18.9%) or primary school teachers (15.3%). Second considerabledifference was in category ‘Education’. It was more often mentionedby biology teachers (29%) than by preschool (15.1%) or primaryschool teachers (10.8%). Many participants mentioned the posi-tive influence of school courses (e.g. biology, geography) and highereducation, particularly biology teachers. Other differences were notsubstantial and therfore not commented.

3.2. Teachers’ views on how to develop young peoples’ care forthe environment and nature

Table 2 represents the categorisation and frequencies from


respondants. Responses (a total of 545) were arranged in sixcategories. Results indicated that there are two most importantcategories. Teachers frequently mentioned experiential learningand outdoor education. They gave examples of numerous outdoor

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

http://www.mizs.gov.si/en/

Please cite this article in press as: G. Torkar, Learning experiences that produce environmentally active and informed minds, NJAS -Wageningen J. Life Sci. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelNJAS-160; No. of Pages 7

4 G. Torkar / NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Table 1Significant life experiences that influenced development of teachers’ attitudes toward nature.

Categories Kindergarten teachers Elementary school teachers Biology teachers Total sample

F % f % f % f %

1. Parents as role models 34 32.1 44 39.6 34 34.0 112 35.32. Childhood outdoors 38 35.8 34 30.6 35 35.0 107 33.83. Countryside: farming,

gardening31 29.2 33 29.7 34 34.0 98 30.9

4. Outdoor recreation and sportactivities

25 23.6 34 30.6 19 19.0 78 24.6

5. Experience of animals andplants

20 18.9 17 15.3 38 38.0 75 23.7

6. Negative experiences:pollution, degradation,radiation

25 23.6 23 20.7 23 23.0 71 22.4

7. Education 16 15.1 12 10.8 29 29.0 57 18.08. Experience of solitude and

freedom14 13.2 22 19.8 16 16.0 52 16.4

9. Grandparents as role models 10 9.4 4 3.6 7 7.0 21 6.610. Organisations and camps 7 6.6 3 2.7 7 7.0 17 5.411. Illness and personal crisis 5 4.7 7 6.3 4 4.0 16 5.012. Media 2 1.9 6 5.4 6 6.0 14 4.413. Teachers and others as role

models and mentors3 2.8 3 2.7 3 3.0 9 2.8

14. Books 3 2.8 3 2.7 1 1.0 7 2.215. Other 26 24.5 25 22.5 25 25.0 76 24.0

259 270 281 810

Table 2Teachers’ views on how to educate children and youth for the environment and nature.

Categories Kindergarten teachers Elementary school teachers Biology teachers Total sample

f % f % f % f %

1. Outdoor education andexperiential learning

62 58.5 67 60.4 32 32.0 161 50.8

2. Discussion 39 36.8 45 40.5 56 56.0 140 44.23. Active participation 34 32.1 37 33.3 25 25.0 96 30.34. Teacher as role model 18 17.0 24 21.6 25 25.0 67 21.15. No answer 14 13.2 8 7.2 6 6.0 28 8.86. Other 25 18.9 19 14.4 18 18.0 62 16.7

187 197 161 545

Table 3Examples of responses on how to educate children and youth for the environment and nature.

Kindergarten teachers Elementary school teachers Biology teachers

Category 1. Outdoor education and experientiallearning

- We are regularly going on walks to natural areas.- We go for walks and talk about nature.- Observing animals, their behaviour and housing.

- We go outside and observe nature with all oursenses.- I teach in a rural area where it is possible to visitnatural areas on a daily basis. We always findsomething new and interesting.

- Organizing excursions to natural areas.- We learn how to recognize animal traces in thesnow.- We visit protected areas and . . .

Category 2. Discussion- We talk about different things that we observe in

the environment. Positive and negative.- We talk about nature, animals and plants.

- We talk a lot about endangered species.- I try to develop pupils’ responsibility towardsenvironment through discussion.- Much attention is devoted to problems ofover-fertilization and spraying of crops, which is aproblem in our municipality.

- We are talking about cruelty to animals, killinganimals for fur and environmental pollution.- We are talking about alternative energy resources.- From examples, where nature has been destroyed,we try to determine human activities that have led tothis.

Category 3. Active participation- We collect our garbage after being outdoors.

- When children found spider in the classroom, wecollected it with a broom and took the spideroutside.- Children are not allowed to tear the flowers.

- Caring for birds in winter.- Students clean the area around the school.- Saving electricity and water supply and wastecollection (glass, paper, plastics).

- Students care for animals in the school vivarium.- Students observe weather conditions and waterquality. The results are recorded in the graphs. -Students plant flowers and donate them for specialoccasions.

Category 4. Teacher as role model- To be a good role model. I don’t tear flowers and

justify why.- My behaviour is very important.

- I want to be an example to children therefore Ibehave responsibly.- I want to be a good role model, therefore I walk toschool or I use public transport.

- . . . and at the same time I realize that the easiestand best way is to teach by example.- I behave responsibly.

Category 5. No answerCategory 6. Other

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

ING ModelN

rnal o

awclcopataeatl

csaacntT

taritscRp

itfseo

tieejs

4

iseescbpabbwce



ctivities (Table 3). Teachers were taking students on naturealks, where they can observe and interact with biota they

annot encounter in school settings or apply what they have beenearning. The form of outdoor activities depended on the age of thehildren with whom teachers worked. Preschool teachers reportedn regular walks to natural areas near the preschools. Manyrimary school teachers also mentioned regular visits to naturalreas, but this often depends on the location of schools. Biologyeachers mentioned excursions to natural areas (e.g. forest, lakend river environments) and nature parks, and provided specificxamples of outdoor activities, for example, learning to recognizenimal tracks in the snow. The results in Table 2 show that biologyeachers practiced outdoor education and experiential learningess often than preschool and primary school teachers.

Teachers also emphasized the importance of classroom dis-ussions concerning nature, pollution, degradation, endangeredpecies etc. Teachers mostly discussed fauna, flora and naturalreas with younger students. When students became older morettention was devoted to environmental problems. Biology tea-hers more often engaged their students in discussions concerningature, pollution, degradation, endangered species and nature pro-ection more so than preschool and primary school teachers (seeable 2).

Some teachers also emphasized the importance of active par-icipation of children and adolescents in environmental protectionnd nature conservation. Frequently mentioned activities wereecycling, sustainable energy use, feeding birds in winter and keep-ng the surrounding school grounds clean. In addition, biologyeachers also reported on activities such as caring for fauna in thechool vivarium, measuring water quality, assisting amphibians toross roads in spring, and growing plants in the school garden.esults in Table 2 show that preschool and primary school teachersractice this more frequently than biology teachers.

In the category ‘Teachers as role models’ they emphasize themportance of their personal example in the environmental educa-ion of children and adolescents. Teachers aim to be a good exampleor students. However, some have also said that the main respon-ibility in developing a child’s relationship with nature and thenvironment lies in the hands of parents who have the greatestverall influence on them.

It is also evident from Table 2 that a considerable number ofeachers gave no answer to the question posed. Sixtytwo (16.7%)deas appeared less than five times or could not be coded with oth-rs and were as a result put into category ‘Other’. Teachers were.g. mentioning the importance of reading environmental books,oining different non-governmental organisations (e.g. mountainociety, scouts), watching documentary films.

. Discussion

Enjoyment of the outdoors and experiential learning, especiallyn the childhood, attitudes of parents, living in the countryside,olitude of remote places, education and experiencing negativenvironmental changes, all instilled in respondents a care for thenvironment and nature. Recalled experiences by teachers wereimilar to those found in previous studies [e.g. 17-19, 25- 27] andonfirm that teachers’ attitudes toward nature are more influencedy factors like personal attributes and the environment in whicherson grew up, than the educational programmes [37]. However,

comparison of results between preschool, primary school andiology teachers revealed that there are considerable differences


etween teaching professions, particularly in their experiencesith animals and plants, and educational system. For biology tea-

hers education is a more influential experience. In the course ofducation they gained greater knowledge on the field of biology


and ecology. Biology teachers’ training system is specialized toteach biology school subjects. The importance of ecological knowl-edge for pro-environmental attitudes and behaviour is supportedby research findings [38,39].

These findings indicate the direction of teachers’ views on thedevelopment of environmental education. Participating teachersespecially emphasised the importance of memorable experiencesoutdoors as children or being raised in the countryside. Findingssupport Tanner’s hypothesis [40] that children must first come toknow and love the natural world before they can become concernedwith its care. Teachers also see experiential learning in the outdoorsas the most important educational approach for the developmentof young peoples’ care for the environment and nature. Extensiveresearch has documented the important role of time spent in theoutdoors for raising environmental awareness [e.g. 1, 3, 17]. In Tibil-isi declaration [29] and Chawla and Flanders Cushing’s article [30]direct experiences with the environment have an important placeamong recommendations for the development of young people’scare and concern for the environment. However, in modern societyless quality time is spent outdoors. Louv [41] described the growingphenomenon he labeled “nature deficit disorder”. Participants mostcommonly emphasize the importance of outdoor education andexperiential learning as a form of teaching students about natureand raising their environmental awareness. Preschool teachers andprimary school teachers reported more frequent visiting to naturalenvironments with students than biology teachers, most likely dueto the school curriculum, which varies throughout the period ofpreschool and compulsory basic school. Sobel [42] suggested thatchildren in preschool and elementary school years need to focuson local environmental actions, i.e. actions in the classroom, theschool yard and the local environment. They should not be bur-dened with distant environmental problems beyond their level ofdirect experiences.

Discussions enable young people to consider a range of per-spectives, integrate what they instructed, share their opinion andrethink their own positions [30]. Results show that preschooland primary school teachers encouraged their students to discussnature, fauna, floras and changes observed within the local environ-ment. While biology teachers, who are working with older studentsaged 11 to 14, encouraged students to discuss topics such as envi-ronmental pollution, degradation, endangered species, alternativeenergy resources and nature protection. Biology teachers more fre-quently used discussion techniques to encourage students to reflecton more distant and complex environmental problems which iswell in line with recommendations for environmental education[29,30]. This is also in line with Sobel’s [42] proposal that studentsdon’t discuss environmental catastrophes before fourth grade.

So far, the discussion mainly provides confirmation of thefindings in the field of significant life experiences and recommen-dations for environmental education. Worth of further discussionare teachers’ views on action and active participation of studentswhich was set as one of the important recommendations forenvironmental education [29,30]. Analysis reveals that teachersunder-emphasize the meaning of recruiting young people intopro-environmental actions taking place in the school and/or localcommunity. Results showed that in particular biology teachersencouraged students to analyse and discuss environmental prob-lems, but rarely empowered them for collective pro-environmentalactions, which could provide them with experiences on how gov-erning processes work and how they can themselves take anactive role in the society. Teachers through their significant lifeexperiences, with the exception of the few mentions of mem-


berships in non-governmental organizations, did not mention anyform of activism or participatory actions where, as Gardner andStern [7] pointed out, people organize to act for the commongood. Low awareness of the importance of active participation

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

ING ModelN

6 rnal o

btBmciatgeobNm

rawesi

5

actfisecgttepupctetrttaor

ltdpm

R

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[



y students in environmental education may be at least par-ially attributted to a teacher’s own experience with participation.eing raised in a Slovenian society, where democratic decision-aking system was uncommon in the past (post-communist

ountry), the importance of active participation in communityssues was not perceived as relevent and, therefore, not encouragedmong students. Additionally, it would be valuable to strengthenhe communication and collaboration between schools and non-overnmental organisations (NGOs) whose competence couldnrich students’ environmental knowledge and awareness. Collab-ration with organisations outside schools was rarely mentionedy participating teachers. Palmer and Birch [5] were convinced thatGOs can have an important role in influencing policy and decision-aking at the highest levels, nationally and internationally.Last but not least, teachers also highlighted the importance of

ole models, such as parents and teachers. They expressed theirwareness of the significance of personal example and behaviour,hich affect young people’s attitudes toward nature and the

nvironment. Teachers are continually observed and judged bytudents, therefore, a teacher’s strong moral position must be anmplicit part of the message the teacher wants youth to absorb [43].

. Conclusions

This paper investigated how Slovene preschool, primary schoolnd biology teachers’ significant life experiences influenced tea-hers’ care for the environment and nature, and what are theireaching practices in environmental education. Generalisation ofndings against different bodies of research confirmed that thetudied groups of Slovenian teachers had similar significant lifexperiences and teaching practices in environmental educationomparable with those in other studies. However, analysis ofroups of teachers revealed that education is a more influen-ially significant life experience among biology teachers, who inhe course of the teacher training system gain greater knowl-dge in the fields of biology and ecology. The analysis of teachingractices in environmental education also revealed that teachersnder-emphasize the meaning of recruiting young people inro-environmental actions taking place in the school and localommunity. In particular biology teachers encourage studentso analyze and discuss environmental problems rather than tompower them toward collective pro-environmental actions. Inhe discussion the interconnection between significant life expe-iences that influenced teachers’ attitudes toward nature as well asheir teaching practices in how to educate children and youth forhe environment was highlited. Lack of incentives to students forctive participation at least partially a result of teacher’s own lackf experience with participation, but there is still a need for furtheresearch.

It is important that all young people have the opportunity toearn how to actively participate in their society. Youth participa-ion is a central feature in the development of citizenship and youthevelopment [44,45]. Participatory models such as Hart’s Ladder ofarticipation [46] can enable teachers to plan teaching activities forore meaningful participation of students in environmental issues.

eferences

[1] J. Palmer, Influences of pro-environmental practices, in: J. Palmer, W., Gold-stein, A. Curnow (Eds.), Planning education to care for the earth. IUCN, Gland,Switzerland and Cambridge, 1995, pp. 3–8.


[2] S. Clayton, G. Myers, Conservation Psychology: understanding and promotinghuman care for nature, Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.

[3] J. Palmer, P. Neal, The Handbook of Environmental Education, Routledge, 1994.[4] P. Stern, Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior,

Journal of Social Issues 56 (2000) 407–424.

[

PRESSf Life Sciences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

[5] J.A. Palmer, J.C. Birch, Education for Sustainability: the contribution and poten-tial of a non-governmental organisation, Environmental Education Research 9(2003) 447–460.

[6] B. Jensen, K. Schnack, The action competence approach in environmental edu-cation, Environmental Education Research 3 (1997) 163–177.

[7] G.T. Gardner, P.C. Stern, Environmental problems and human behaviour, Pear-son Custom Publishing, Boston, 2002.

[8] A.E.J. Wals, F. Geerlin-Eijiff, F. Hubeek, S. van der Kroon, J. Vader, All mixed up?Instrumental and emancipatory learning toward a more sustainable world:Considerations for EE policymakers, Applied Environmental Education andCommunication 7 (2008) 55–65.

[9] S. Sterling, Learning for resilience, or the resilient learner?: towards a necessaryreconciliation in a paradigm of sustainable education. Environmental Educa-tion Research (Special Issue, Resilience in social-ecological systems: The roleof learning and education) 16 (2010) 511–528.

10] T.M. Schusler, M.E., Krasny, Environmental Action as Context for YouthDevelopment, The Journal of Environmental Education 41 (2010)208-223.

11] D. Selby, As the heating happens: Education for Sustainable Development orEducation for Sustainable Contraction? International Journal of Innovation andSustainable Development 2 (2007) 249–267.

12] D. Selby, The firm and shaky ground of education for sustainable development,Journal of Geography in Higher Education 30 (2006) 351–365.

13] K.J. Korfiatis K.J. Environmental education and the science of ecology: explo-ration of an uneasy relationship, Environmental Education Research 11 (2005)235–248.

14] M. Brackney, F.T. McAndrew, Ecological worldviews and receptivity to differenttypes of arguments for preserving endangered species, Journal of Environmen-tal Education 33 (2001) 17–20.

15] A. Bandura, Self-efficacy mechanisms in human agency, American Psychologist37 (1982) 122–147.

16] S.K. Jacobson, M.D. McDuff, M.C. Monroe, Conservation education and outreachtechniques, Oxford University Press, New York, 2006.

17] T. Tanner, Significant life experiences: a new research area in environmentaleducation, Journal of Environmental Education 11 (1980) 20–24.

18] S. Catling, R. Greenwood, F. Martin, P. Owens, Formative experiences of primarygeography educators, International Research in Geographical and Environmen-tal Education 19 (2010) 341–350.

19] L. Chawla, Significant life experiences revisited, Journal of Environmental Edu-cation 29 (1998) 11–21.

20] L. Chawla, Life paths into effective environmental action, Journal of Environ-mental Education 31 (1999) 15–26.

21] S. Gough, Significant life experiences (SLE) research: a view from somewhere,Environmental Education Research 5 (1999) 353–363.

22] S.J. Hsu, Significant life experiences affect environmental action: a confirma-tion study in eastern Taiwan, Environmental Education Research 15 (2009)497–517.

23] J.E. Lewis, The Significant Life Experiences (SLEs) of Humane Educators, Societyand Animals 15 (2007) 285–298.

24] J. Palmer, Development of concern for the environment and formativeexperiences of educators, Journal of Environmental Education 24 (1993)26–30.

25] J. Palmer, B. Bajd, D. Mati, E. Tsaliki, Significant influences on the developmentod adults’ enviromental awareness in the UK, Slovenia and Greece, Environ-mental Education Research 4 (1998) 429–444.

26] J.A. Palmer, J. Suggate, I. Robottom, P. Hart, Significant life experiences andfor- mative influences on the development of adults’ environmental awarenessin the UK, Australia, and Canada, Environmental Education Research 5 (1999)181–200.

27] B. Bajd, J. Palmer, J. Suggate, Vplivi, pomembni za ekolosko osvescenost uciteljevnaravoslovja, Educa 7 (1997) 19–30.

28] P. Neal, J. Palmer, The handbook of Environmental Education. Routledge, Lon-don, New York, 1994.

29] S. Sterling, Mapping environmental education. In: WDS Leal Filho, JA Palmer(Eds.) Key issues in Environmental education. UNESCO, University of Brafford,1992.

30] L. Chawla, D. Flanders Cushing, Education for strategic environmentalbehaviour, Environmental Education Research 13 (2007) 437–452.

31] L. Cohen, L., Manion, K. Morrison, Research methods in education. 7th ed. Rout-ledge, London, 2011.

32] E.D. Bahovec, S., Kranjc, I., Cvetko, L. Marjanovic Umek, M. Videmsek Kurikulumza vrtce: predsolska vzgoja v vrtcih, Ministrstvo za solstvo in sport, Zavod RSza solstvo, Ljubljana, 1999.

33] J. Krek (Ed.), White Paper on Education in the Republic of Slovenia, Ministry ofEducation, Ljubljana, 1996.

34] J. Krek (Ed.), White Paper on Education in the Republic of Slovenia, Ministry ofEducation and Sport, Ljubljana, 2011.

35] Statistical yearbook 2012 for Republic of Slovenia, available at:http://www.stat.si/letopis/2011/06 11/06-03-11.htm. Accessed 20 October2013.

36] Eurostat, Education statistics, available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/


statistics explained/index.php/Education statistics#Compulsory education.Accessed 20 October 2013.

37] A.O. Demirbolat, Education faculty students’ tendencies and beliefs about theteacher’s role in education: A case study in a Turkish University, Teaching andTeacher Education 22 (2006) 1068–1083.

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S1573-5214(14)00015-3/sbref0010





































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































ING ModelN

rnal o

[

[

[

[

[

[

[44] Keepin’ It Real: A resource for involving young people in decision-making.



38] J.L. Meinhold, A.J. Malkus, Adolescent Environmental Behaviors: Can Knowl-edge, Attitudes, and Self-Efficacy Make a Difference? Environment andBehavior 37 (2005) 511-532.

39] G. Torkar, P. Mohar, T. Gregorc, I. Nekrep, M. Hönigsfeld Adamic, The conser-vation knowledge and attitudes of teenagers in Slovenia toward the Eurasian


Otter, International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 5 (2010)341–352.

40] T. Tanner, Conceptual and Instructional Issues in Environmental EducationToday. Journal of Environmental Education 5 (1974) 48-53.

41] R. Louv, Last Child in the Woods, Algonquin Books, Chapel Hill, NC, 2005.

[

[


42] D. Sobel, Beyond ecophobia: Reclaiming the heart in nature education. OrionSociety, Great Barrington, MA, 1996.

43] G.L. Krasko, This unbearable boredom of being: A crisis of meaning in America,New York, iUniverse, 2004.


Ministry of Youth Development, Wellington, New Zeland, 2009.45] T.M. Schusler, M.E., Krasny, Environmental Action as Context for Youth Devel-

opment. The Journal of Environmental Education 41 (2010) 208-223.46] R. Hart, Children’s Participation. Earthscan Publications, London, 1997.

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.03.002






















































































Documents

Learning experiences that produce environmentally active and informed minds