Exploring environmental literacy through demographic variables

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 4, 926 - 937, 01.12.2013

Gökhan Öztürk Özgül Yılmaz Tüzün , Gaye Teksöz

Öz

This study aims to investigate the effect of selected demographic variables on pre-service teachers’ environmental literacy. Although there are several demographic variables to have some degree of relationship with components of environmental literacy, gender, academic major, and grade level are chosen to investigate further in the Turkish context because of their prevalent usage in earlier studies. The sample of the study is comprised of 560 pre-service teachers enrolled in different academic majors. Environmental Literacy Test (ELT) was used as an instrument to assess environmental literacy and MANOVA was performed to investigate differences of PTs’ environmental literacy in terms demographic variables. Findings of the study indicated that gender, year of enrollment, and academic major had significant effect on components of environmental literacy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Environmental literacy; pre-service teachers; gender; academic major; year of enrollment

Demografik Değişkenler ile Çevre Okuryazarlığının Araştırılması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı seçilmiş demografik değişkenlerin aday öğretmenlerin çevre okuryazarlığına etkisinin
araştırılmasıdır. Türkiye koşulları ve önceki çalışmaların sonuçları göz önüne alınarak, çevre okuryazarlığı
bileşenlerini etkileyen demografik değişkenler arasından cinsiyet, sınıf (yıl) ve akademik alan bu çalışmanın
değişkenleri olarak seçilmiştir. Çevre okuryazarlığının belirlenmesi amacı ile Çevre Okuryazarlığı Testi kullanılmış
ve aday öğretmenlerin çevre okuryazarlığı ile cinsiyet, sınıf ve akademik alan değişkenleri arasında farkların
belirlenmesi için MANOVA kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın bulguları cinsiyet, sınıf (yıl) ve akademik alan
değişkenlerinin çevre okuryazarlığını etkileyen değişkenler olduğunu göstermiştir.

Kaynakça

• Alp, E., Ertepinar, H. Tekkaya, C., & Yilmaz, A. (2006). A statistical analysis of children’s environmental knowledge and attitudes in Turkey. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 15(3), 210-223.
• Berberoglu, G. & Tosunoglu, C. (1995). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of an environmental attitude scale (EAS) for Turkish university students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 26, 40–44.
• Blocker, T. & Eckberg, D. (1997). Gender and environmentalism: Results from the 1993 General Social Survey. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 841-858.
• Brundtland, G. H. (1987). The world commission on environment and development. Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bord, R. J., & O’Connor, R. E. (1997). The gender gap in environmental attitudes: The case of perceived vulnerability to risk. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 830-840.
• Cabuk, B. & Karacaoglu, C. (2003). Universite ogrencilerinin cevre duyarliliklarinin incelenmesi. Ankara University Journal of Faculity of Educational Sciences, 36(1-2), 189-192.
• Cambridge Dictionaries Online. (2009). Retrieved May 20th. 2009, from http://dictionary.camridge.org
• Coyle, K. (2005). Environmental literacy in America: What ten years of NEETF/Roper research and related studies say about environmental literacy in U.S. Washington, DC: The National Environmental Education & Training Foundation.
• Disinger, J. F. & Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental literacy. ERIC/CSMEE Digest. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/1992-1/literacy.htm
• Goldman, D., Yavetz, B. & Pe’er, S. (2006). Environmental literacy in teacher training in Israel: environmental behavior of new students. Journal of Environmental Education, 38(1), 3-22.
• Goldman,D., Yavetz, B. & Pe’er, S. (2007). Environmental literacy in teacher training. Attitudes, knowledge and environmental behavior of beginning students. Journal of Environmental Education, 39(1), 45- 59.
• Harvey, G. (1977). Environmental education: A delineation of substantive structure. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38: 611A-12A.
• Hsu, S. Y. (1997). An assessment of environmental literacy and analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behaviors held by Heuleian county of Taiwan. Dissertation Abstracts International. 288C, 9731641.
• Hunter, L. M., Hatch, A., & Johnson, A. (2004). Cross-national gender variation in environmental behaviors. Social Science Quarterly, 85, 677–694.
• McDonald, W. & Hara, N. (1994). Gender differences in environmental concern among college students. Sex Roles, 31(5-6), 369-374.
• Moody, G., Alkaff, H., Garrison, D., & Golley, F. (2005). Assessimg the environmental literacy requirement at university of Georgia. Journal of Environmental Education, 36(4), 3-9.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development-OECD. (2008). Environmental outlook to 2030, simulation report, 2, Paris: OECD Publications.
• Negev, M., Sagy, G., Garb, Y., Salzberg, A., & Tal, A. (2008). Evaluating the environmental literacy of Israeli elementary and high school students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 3-20.
• Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Pe’er, S., Goldman, D., & Yavetz, B. (2007). Environmental literacy in teacher training: Attitudes, knowledge, and environmental behavior of beginning students. Journal of Environmental Education, 39, 45-60.
• Riechard, D. E., & Peterson, S. J. (1998). Perception of environmental risk related to gender, community socioeconomic setting, age, and locus of control. The Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 11-19.
• Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental Literacy: Its roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s. Columbus, OH: ERIC/SMEAC Information Reference Center.
• Schultz, P. W. & Zalenzy, L. (1999). Values as predictors of environmental attitude: Evidence for consistency across 14 countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(3), 255-265.
• Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Tikka, P. M., Kuitunen, M. T., & Tynys, S. M. (2000). Effect of educational background on students’ attitude, activity levels, and knowledge concerning the environment. The Journal of Environmetal Education, 31(3), 12Tindall, D. B., Davies, S., & Mauboules, C. (2003). Activism and conservation behaviour in an environmental movement: The contradictory effect of gender. Society and Natural Resources, 16, 909-932.
• Tuncer, G., Ertepinar, H., Tekkaya, C., & Sungur, S. (2005). Environmental attitudes of young people in Turkey: Effect of school type and gender. Environmental Education Research, 11(2), 215-233.
• Tuncer, G., Tekkaya, C., Sungur, S., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Kaplowitz, M. (2009). Assessing pre-service teachers’ environmental literacy in Turkey as a mean to develop teacher education programs. Journal of Educational Development, 29, 426-436.
• UNEP. (1992). Report of the fourth meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer. UNEP, Copenhagen.
• UNEP. (2002, August). Report of the world summit on sustainable development. New York: UNEP Publications. Weaver, A. (2002). Determinants of environmental attitudes: A five-country comparison. International Journal of Sociology, 32, 77-108.
• Weinburg, M. (1995). Gender difference in student attitudes towards science: A meta analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 387-398.
• Yilmaz, O., Boone, W. J., & Andersen, H. O. (2004). Views of elementary and middle school Turkish students toward environmental issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(12), 1527-1546.
• Zelezny, L. C., Chua, P., & Aldrich, C. (2002). New ways of thinking about environmentalism: Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 443–457.