Implementation of a curriculum for environmental education as ...

Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies 2012 Volume (issue) 4(2): 1067-1076

Implementation of a curriculum for environmental education as education for sustainable development in Slovenian upper secondary schools Andrej Šorgo*, Asja Kamenšek University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia

Received 25 October 2010; accepted 29 May 2011

Abstract The Curriculum for Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development was introduced in Slovenian compulsory and upper secondary schools. 350 first-year university students coming from about half of all Slovenian secondary schools answered a questionnaire about their experiences concerning its content and their exposure to Environmental Education in their previous schooling. One unsatisfactory finding of the study is that some students had not been informed about important environmental issues, depending on the school or even on the teacher selection for a particular class at such a school. Issues covered more frequently by popular media, such as Global Warming, have a greater chance of being included in comparison to more specialized issues such as loss of biodiversity. The more important problem is that formal teaching is mostly about environmental issues, but does not include teaching within the environment nor using the environment in proactive and active inquiry- and problem-based learning. Additionally, environmental issues are not taught as cross curricular and interdisciplinary themes, a failing that can result in fragmented knowledge and an insufficient ability to evaluate a problem critically from different perspectives as a vital part of environmental literacy. Keywords: Curriculum; Environmental education; Environmental literacy; Secondary schools; Slovenia;

© Sila Science. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Owing its growing population, pollution and fast depletion of the sources, human society is challenged by the need to change the developmental paradigm towards sustainability, e.g., [13]. In the process of raising awareness among and the competence of citizens and societies in managing our planet in a sustainable and environmentally friendly manner, schools must play their part and accept responsibility for building “environmental literacy” [4, 5] by means of ____________________ *

Corresponding author. Tel.: +386-(0)229-3709; fax.: +386-(0)229-3709. E-mail addresses: [email protected] [email protected] (A. Šorgo).

1068

A. Šorgo, A. Kamenšek / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies

4

(2012)

1067-1076

environmental education [6]. The concept of environmental literacy is not understood monolithically by different authors [7]; however it can be briefly summarized as having competency in recognizing environmental problems, as well as correct attitude, motivation and skills to take an active role in solving them. Even if there are different views about the content, goals and most suitable strategies and methods to achieve environmental literacy, the dominant view is that students should construct their knowledge through active learning by methods and strategies that emphasize such learning [8-10], and teachers are recognized as the key element in such education [11]. The process of environmental education for sustainable development (ESD) should start as early as the kindergarten years [12, 13] and continue throughout the lifespan in a process of lifelong learning. In this process schools have additional responsibility in contrast to others involved in environmental education and activities. In school, ESD should be based on scientific facts and logical reasoning [5, 6], what is not always the case in public debates on many environmental issues [14, 15]. The Slovenian school system is highly centralized, and almost all schools are public. Curricula for primary and secondary schools and the content for all subjects are prepared by teams of experts and approved by governmental bodies. The majority of the curriculum is compulsory, and schools have only limited autonomy in offering elective subjects or extracurricular activities. Teachers have only a restricted choice of teaching content, although they do have full autonomy in choosing methods of classroom-work. ESD is required to be offered as an elective subject, as a content within compulsory subjects and as fieldwork. Some schools have established extracurricular interest groups organized by the school, or have joined environmental activities organized by various nongovernmental organizations such as the Eco-schools programme [16], or meetings of young ornithologists [17]. More information about the Slovenian school system, curricula, syllabi and external examinations is available on the web-pages of the Ministry of Education and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia [18], the National Education Institute [19], and the National Examinations Centre [20]. Beginning with the year 2008, pre-university schools must incorporate into their programmes the Curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development [21]. This curriculum is structured in a cross-curricular approach as a list of goals, objectives and recommendations, and does not prescribe in which subject or extracurricular form a particular topic or activity should be embedded. In this way the decision on how to make the curriculum operational is left to the schools. The reason behind the implementation of such a form of curriculum lay in the acknowledged complexity of environmental issues, where explanations and solutions do not lie in a single domain but at the intersection of science, social sciences and humanities. The term used for such complex issues that cross the domains of traditional disciplines and the dichotomy between science and the social sciences is socioscientific issue [22]. Another impetus for the creators of the curriculum was to allow the inclusion of local themes and the examples in the form of situated learning. This does not mean that before 2008 there was no Environmental Education in Slovenian schools, on the contrary in the late 1980s and again in the late 1990s the Slovenian school system was radically transformed, and Environmental Education gradually became a constituent part of compulsory primary and lower secondary schools and elective upper secondary schools. In the documents pertaining to reform in the late 1980s environmental education was mostly regarded as part of the Science subjects and Ecology. As a reflection of increasing environmental awareness, e.g. [23], the White Paper on Education in the Republic of Slovenia [24], the basis for school reform in the nineties, emphasised the importance of


4 (2012)

1067-1076

1069

education for a healthy lifestyle and development of a responsible relationship with the environment and nature [25]. As part of these educational changes, a Committee of Environmental Education was established. The Committee checked all working versions of syllabi and suggested the inclusion of Environmental issues where appropriate as cross curricular themes to the other Committees responsible for particular subjects. The Committee also produced two syllabi for elective subjects in lower secondary and general upper secondary schools. About ten years after the school reform, all syllabi were checked and updated and part of the changes was the new Curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development [21]. 2. 1. Purpose of the study The purpose of the study was to establish the recent state of inclusion of elements of the Curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development into upper secondary schools in Slovenia. Based on the findings, it would be possible to identify uncovered content, goals and objectives, and to prepare strategies for the implementation of missing content in schools. 2. 2. Research questions were as follows: Which goals and objectives from the curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development already form a part of school curricula? Which activities from the curriculum were performed by students? Are environmental issues taught as cross curricular themes? Which methods are predominantly used in environmental education? 2. Methods 2. 1. Structure of the questionnaire and sampling The sample comprised 350 first-year university students who had finished their secondary education the previous year. The students came from five faculties of the two Slovenian Universities. In such a manner we were able to provide a sample of students from a greater number of different secondary schools. 233 students from the sample (66.6%) named their secondary school and 117 (33.4%) left this field blank. Altogether 66 schools were identified, geographically from all parts of Slovenia. It is possible that some additional schools are hidden in the missing answers, so it can be calculated that students from about half of all Slovenian secondary schools (n = 163) answered. 68 (19.4%) of the respondents are males and 280 (80.0%) are females and 2 (0.6%) stayed unidentified. The sample is biased toward females, but because they were asked about their secondary school experiences in the classroom, a matter which is not affected by gender, it can be considered that the results represent a good estimate of what is happening in ESD in secondary schools. 269 (76.9%) of the students finished secondary school with the general Matura exams, 78 (22.3%) with the vocational Matura exams, and 3 (0.9%) did not provide an answer. Questionnaires were delivered anonymously in October and November 2009.

1070


4

(2012)

1067-1076

2. 2. Structure of the questionnaire The questionnaire was constructed in five parts: 1. One question where students were asked to provide their opinion about the quantity of environmental education in their secondary school. 2. A closed Likert-based 8-item questionnaire. Students were asked to provide answers about their experiences with eight basic ideas from the Curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development. The options provided were as follows: 1) We did not hear about this topic; 2) This topic was only mentioned; 3) This topic was explained; 4) This topic was explained in detail in one subject 5) This topic was explained in detail in more than one subject; 3. A closed Likert-based 22-item questionnaire. Students were asked to provide answers based on their experiences with particular topics and activities from Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development. The options provided were as in the previous set. 4. Students were asked about the frequency of methods used in Environmental Education on he following scale: 1) never; 2) once or twice a year; 3) three to five times a year; 4) once or twice a month; 5) in most lessons. 5. Personal data was collected. 2. 3. Data analysis The data analysis was carried out with the statistical software SPSS® 17.0. Frequencies, means and standard deviations are reported in tables. 3. Results and discussion The finding that, in the opinion of a little less than half the students, (Table 1), there were enough or too many environmental issues during their upper secondary schooling is not satisfactory. Table 1. Opinions about the quantity of environmental issues in the curriculum of secondary schools Answers Too many environmental issues.

f 12

f% 3.4

Enough environmental issues.

150

42.9

Too few environmental issues.

113

32.3

Environmental issues were almost absent.

73

20.9

Sum

348

99.4

2

0.6

350

100.0

Missing Total

Even if one accepts the argument that it is the opinion of only about one-third of the most concerned students that there are too few environmental issues, the fact that one-fifth of them reported the almost complete absence of environmental issues cannot be overlooked. The underlying reasons lie in the already overloaded curricula of existing subjects [26], and the expectations of external examinations [27]. Because of the overloaded curriculum and the external exams, teachers are unwilling to include environmental issues, since such activities


4 (2012)

1067-1076

1071

do not produce better outcomes on high-stakes examinations. Because curricula are prescribed by the authorities, little space is left to the teacher. Changes therefore should be made [28-30] in top-down restructuring of curricula towards inclusion of known environmental problems with some space remaining, where emerging issues can be included. An important role in the inclusion of environmental education is played by the principals [31], with whom lies the responsibility for giving environmental education its appropriate place in curricular and extracurricular school activities. Table 2. Frequency of the methods used in Environmental Education in secondary schools 1* 2 3 4 5 M SD % % % % % Debate, discussion, and dialogue between 348 45 80 99 83 41 2.99 1.21 students and teachers. 99.4 12.9 22.9 28.3 23.7 11.7 Classroom discussion of habits and experiences 349 36 106 117 72 18 2.80 1.05 with regard to the environment. 99.7 10.3 30.3 33.4 20.6 5.1 Group work and exchange of experiences 348 73 103 93 62 17 2.56 1.15 between schoolmates. 99.4 20.9 29.4 26.6 17.7 4.9 349 81 176 71 19 2 Outdoor activities. 2.10 0.84 99.7 23.1 50.3 20.3 50.4 0.6 349 130 136 58 19 6 Environmentally important actions. 1.95 0.95 99.7 37.1 38.9 16.6 5.4 1.7 Project work involving teachers of different 349 161 112 51 21 4 1.84 0.96 subjects. 99.7 46.0 32.0 14.6 6.0 1.1 349 225 87 29 6 2 Role play and simulation. 1.49 0.77 99.7 64.3 24.9 8.3 1.7 0.6 * 1) never; 2) once or twice a year; 3) three to five times a year; 4) once or twice a month; 5) in most lessons. Statements

N

From the results about inclusion of active methods in ESD (Table 3) one can conclude that the dominant teaching method in environmental education is direct classroom instruction. Active methods, where students are fully engaged [32, 33], are crucial for environmental education but are in most cases scheduled only occasionally, while the project-based approach [34] is used only rarely or never. These findings can be recognized as one of the critical points in building environmentally literate citizen who can make informed decisions [35], and transfer environmental values to others outside the school educational arena [36]. These results are in line with findings about the prevailing methods of Biology teaching [37] and the way students are generally taught in Slovenia [38], so it looks as if problems are not restricted to environmental issues but are deeply rooted in Slovenian teaching culture. Additionally, it can be concluded that the cornerstones of ESD are not evenly included. Most of the time is used for teaching about the environment while teaching within the environment and using environment for situated learning occurs only rarely. This finding calls for change involving the shift of classroom work towards inquiry- and problem-based methods, situated learning and field-work as often as possible [39-41]. Additional studies about obstacles in teaching and teachers’ attitudes toward environmental education [42, 43] are necessary. From the Table 3 and Appendix it can be concluded that students are mostly informed about the existence of an environmental issue within one subject, an approach which is not conducive environmental literacy [4, 44], and ESD. In such a manner, a cross curricular and holistic approach toward ESD cannot be achieved, so it can hardly be expected that students would connect pieces of knowledge into a meaningful interdisciplinary whole conducive [45], or combine knowledge and attitudes to produce environmentally friendly behaviour [46];

1072


4

(2012)

1067-1076

Table 3. Inclusion of basic assumptions from the Curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable development into secondary school curricula Statements

N

1* % 12 3.4

2 % 58 16.6

3 % 92 26.3

4 % 99 28.3

5 % 87 24.9

M %

SD %

Global warming is the result of unsustainable 348 3.55 1.14 management, especially of fossil fuels usage. 99.4 Natural reasons and human activity can introduce 11 69 111 101 58 toxic substances in the environment, which can 350 3.36 1.07 3.1 19.7 31.7 28.9 16.6 endanger biodiversity. The quantity of different natural sources (e. g. 6 52 105 138 49 fertile soil, oil, water, forests) is limited, so they 350 3.49 0.97 1.7 14.9 30.0 39.4 14.0 must be sustainably managed. Biodiversity is a result of billions of years of 348 28 53 131 99 37 evolution of living beings and has been recently 3.18 1.07 99.4 8.0 15.1 37.4 28.3 10.6 endangered by human activities. There are differences in environmental problems 348 32 74 121 88 33 between developed and undeveloped countries, 3.05 1.10 99.4 9.1 21.1 34.6 25.1 9.4 and the gap in meeting basic needs is widening. The usability of energy sources is determined by 30 119 113 70 18 350 2.79 1.02 the mode and consequences of their usage. 8.6 34.0 32.3 20.0 5.1 Decisions about the use of natural resources cannot be based only on knowledge about 40 103 130 56 21 available technology, but on a balance between 350 2.76 1.05 11.4 29.4 37.1 16.0 6.0 short-term benefits and long-term impact on the environment. Humans use up natural resources in much shorter 43 104 134 49 20 350 2.71 1.04 time than was needed for their production. 12.3 29.7 38.3 14.0 5.7 *1) We did not hear about this topic; 2) This topic was only mentioned; 3) This topic was explained; 4) This topic was explained in detail in one subject 5) This topic was explained in detail in more than one subject.

[47]. Because environmental issues are not discussed there remains considerable room for unscientific explanations and informal reasoning [48-57]. Additionally, it can be recognized that it is mostly the themes which receive substantial media coverage, such as climate change are the ozone hole that are covered in more than one subject. Loss of biodiversity, on the other hand, is left to Biology teachers, and if it is omitted these students would never hear about this topic in school and would rely on chance for their information. 4. Conclusions Many parts of the Curriculum for Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable Development have already become part of the teaching and learning experience in secondary schools. We find it unacceptable that some students remain ignorant about important environmental issues, and that the level of awareness varied by school and according to which teacher had a particular class. More significantly, environmental issues are mostly conveyed through formal instruction while teaching in the environment and using the environment for active inquiry- and problem-based learning are uncommon. Moreover, environmental issues are not being taught in a cross-curricular or interdisciplinary manner; this produces only fragmented knowledge and a deficiency in critical evaluation of problems from varied perspectives. For teacher educators and providers of in-service trainings therefore there is pressing need to improve classroom work by the education of teachers. Training should be prepared not only for teachers of one particular subject but schools as a whole if the goal is to include the Curriculum effectively.


4 (2012)

1067-1076

1073

Appendix: Inclusion of contents, goals and activities of Curriculum of Environmental Education as Education for Sustainable development into secondary school curricula. Statements

N % 347 99.1

1* % 8 2.3

2 % 33 9.4

3 % 112 32.0

4 % 113 32.3

5 % 81 23.1

M

SD

We discussed the causes and consequences of the ozone hole 3.65 1.01 and global warming We were informed that terrestrial and marine ecosystems and 349 6 35 110 123 75 living conditions around the world are changing because of 3.65 0.98 99.7 1.7 10.0 31.4 35.1 21.4 global warming (e.g,, melting of glaciers). We discussed the importance of water circulation, noted the problems of lack of water resources and gained an appreciation 349 16 49 95 121 68 3.50 1.09 of how and why we need to conserve and efficiently manage 99.7 4.6 14.0 27.1 34.6 19.4 water. We discussed the unpredictable consequences of actions and our 349 16 71 132 75 55 3.23 1.08 shared responsibility for these effects. 99.7 4.6 20.3 37.7 21.4 15.7 We explored the most important environmental issues (e.g., 358 38 74 112 84 40 sources of pollution, water pollution) so as to understand why 3.04 1.16 99.4 10.9 21.1 32.0 24.0 11.4 species and some areas in Slovenia are protected. The importance of developing positive views about protecting 347 32 94 131 56 34 2.90 1.09 and conserving the environment was emphasized. 99.1 9.1 26.9 37.4 16.0 9.7 The importance of natural resources was stressed and the 347 51 89 110 72 25 negative impact of human intervention in the natural 2.80 1.14 99.1 14.6 25.4 31.4 20.6 7.1 environment was assessed. We learned about positive and negative environmental changes 346 37 96 122 69 22 so as to encourage interest in maintaining the balance of nature 2.84 1.06 98.9 10.6 27.4 34.9 19.7 6.3 by seeking solutions for environmental problems. We determined how different living needs (e.g., food, hygiene, 347 36 83 140 68 20 transport) can be met in a more or less environmentally friendly 2.86 1.03 99.1 10.3 23.7 40.0 19.4 5.7 way. We analyzed the impact of different consumer habits (e.g,, media influence, tradition, peer groups) and ways to change 348 49 104 121 55 19 2.69 1.07 those habits (for example, better opportunities for cyclists, 99.4 14.0 29.7 34.6 15.7 5.4 public transport). We analyzed various positive and negative effects of economic 348 67 94 93 76 18 and technological development (e. g., promotion of constructed 2.67 1.16 99.4 19.1 26.9 26.6 21.7 5.1 wetlands). We recognized the potential of individuals and their 348 46 125 124 36 17 responsibility for enforcing sustainable solutions to 2.58 1.01 99.4 13.1 35.7 35.4 10.3 4.9 environmental issues. We planned the environment we would want to live in and 347 29 98 90 43 17 2.37 1.16 discussed various scenarios with the desired future. 99.1 28.3 28.0 25.7 12.3 4.9 We were given the task to set environmental goals (e. g., 348 100 108 88 36 16 eliminate bad habits) and look for solutions that could be 2.31 1.13 99.4 28.6 30.9 25.1 10.3 4.6 achieved. We discussed about native varieties and breeds (those that live 346 73 110 77 72 14 2.55 1.15 only in a particular area). 98.9 20.9 31.4 22.9 20.6 4.0 We were presented twith problems associated with the insertion of nitrogen into terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (e. g., 349 64 118 96 58 13 2.54 1.08 fertilizer) and phosphorus entering aquatic ecosystems wia 99.7 18.3 33.7 27.4 16.6 3.7 sewage. We associated organisms with their environment and anticipated 349 62 84 109 81 13 the long-term consequences on the diversity of the ecosystem 2.71 1.12 99.7 17.7 24.0 31.1 23.1 3.7 (e.g., owing to climate change or global warming). We explored the biodiversity of the nearby ecosystem and 344 93 87 101 52 11 2.42 1.13 explained the importance of research in ecological terms. 28.3 26.6 24.9 28.9 14.9 3.1 We discussed about the effects of our activities and those of other individuals on the environment (e.g., patterns of 347 100 110 85 42 10 2.29 1.09 consumption) and critically analyzed media messages (e.g., TV 99.1 28.6 31.4 24.3 12.0 2.9 commercials). We investigated the changes in the domestic environment (e.g., 349 114 117 81 28 9 at school, at home) and examples of our own behavior (e.g., 2.14 1.05 99.7 32.6 33.4 23.1 8.0 2.6 assessment of energy balance). We compared the footprint size of different activities and 346 76 108 104 50 8 products and monitored the environmental impact throughout 2.44 1.06 4 21.7 30.9 29.7 14.3 2.3 the life cycle (production-use-waste). We were presented with actions to protect biodiversity (e.g., 348 113 133 65 32 5 2.09 1.00 natural park, seed banks, sustainable management, bio-farming). 99.4 32.2 38.0 18.6 9.1 1.4 *1) We did not hear about this topic; 2) This topic was only mentioned; 3) This topic was explained; 4) This topic was explained in detail in one subject 5) This topic was explained in detail in more than one subject

1074


4

(2012)

1067-1076

References [1] OECD. OECD books: Sustainable Development Critical Issues, 2001. [2] Demirbas A. Energy issues in energy education. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part A 2011;27:209–220. [3] Council of The European Union. 2009 Review of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy - Presidency Report, 2009. Online: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st16/st16818.en09.pdf (25 Oct 2010) [4] Brennan A. Environmental Literacy and Educational Ideal. Environ Val 1994;1:3–16. [5] Schneider S H. Defining and Teaching Environmental Literacy. Trends Ecol Evol 1997;11:457–457. [6] UNESCO. Review of Contexts and Structures for Education for Sustainable Development. Learning for a sustainable world, 2009. Online: http://www.unesco.org/education/justpublished_desd2009.pdf (25 Okt 2010) [7] Erdogan M, Usak M. Curricular and Extra-Curricular Activities to Develop the Environmental Awareness of Young Students: A Case From Turkey. Odgojne Znan 2009;1:73–85. [8] Hart P. Environmental Education. In: Abell, K. S., Lederman, G. N. Handbook of Research on Science Education. Lewrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Mahwah, New Jersey, 2007:689–726. [9] Hungerford HR. Environmental education (EE) for the 21st Century: Where have we been? Where are we now? Where are we headed?. J Environ Educ 2010;1:1–6. [10] Aydin S, Yel M. The effect of brain based learning biology education upon the academic success and attitude. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:87–98. [11] Marcinkowski T J. Contemporary Challenges and Opportunities in Environmental Education: Where Are We Headed and What Deserves Our Attention?. J Environ Educ 2010;1:34–54. [12] Vodopivec Lepičnik J. Objectives and tasks of environmental education in kindergarten. Didact Slov-Pedagos 2010;2: 3–18. [13] Inan HZ. Teaching science process skills in kindergarten. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:47–64. [14] Zimmerman M. Science, Nonscience, and Nonsense: Approaching Environmental Literacy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. 1995. [15] Sadler TD. Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. J Res Sci Teach 2004;5:513–536. [16] Eco-schools. Online: http://www.ekosola.si/ (25 Okt 2010) [17] Šorgo A. Ornithology Meeting to Raise Environmental Awareness. Connect: UNESCO Int Sci Tech Environ Educ Newsl 1995;4: 9. [18] Ministry of Education and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia. Online: http://www.mss.gov.si/ (25 Okt 2010) [19] National Education Institute. Online: http://www.zrss.si/ (25 Okt 2010) [20] National Examinations Centre. Online: http://www.ric.si/ . (25 Okt 2010) [21] Zupan A, Požarnik Marentič B, Vovk Korže A., Orel M. Kurikul okoljske vzgoje za gimnazije. Okoljska vzgoja kot vzgoja in izobraževanje za trajnostni razvoj. Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport, Zavod RS za šolstvo. 2008. Online: http://www.zrss.si/pdf/OKO_K_OKOLJ_VZGOJA_gimn.pdf (25 Okt 2010) [22] Zeidler D. Developing Socio-Cultural and Human Values in Science and Technology Through Socioscientific Issues. Keynote lecture at the XIV. IOSTE Conf. Bled, 13-18 June, 2010. [23] Agenda 21. Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet. Sitarz, D. (ed.) Boulder, CO: Earthpress, 1994. [24] White Paper on Education in the Republic of Slovenia. Krek J.(ed.). Ljubljana, Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport, 1995. [25] Torkar G. Teachers' value and their relation towards environmentalism and nature protection. Didact Slov-Pedagos 2009;1:97–108.


4 (2012)

1067-1076

1075

[26] Šorgo A, Šteblaj M. Curricula and their impact on interdisciplinary integration of natural science subjects in high school. Didact Slov-Pedagos 2007;1-2:113–127. [27] Ivanuš Grmek M, Krečič Javornik M. Impact of external examinations (Matura) on school lessons. Educ Stud 2004;3: 319–329. [28] Hodson D. Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. Int J Sci Educ 2003;6:645–670. [29] Sadler TD, Barab SA, Scott B. What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Res Sci Educ 2007;4:371–391. [30] Menzel S, Bogeholz S. The loss of biodiversity as a challenge for sustainable development: How do pupils in Chile and Germany perceive resource dilemmas? Res Sci Educ 2009;4:429–447. [31] Zachariou A, Kadji-Beltran C. Cypriot primary school principals' understanding of education for sustainable development key terms and their opinions about factors affecting its implementation. Environ Educ Res 2009;3:315–342. [32] Dean D Jr, Kuhn D. Direct instruction vs. discovery: The long view. Sci Educ 2006;3:384–397. [33] DiCarlo SE. Too Much Content, not Enough Thinking, and Too Little FUN! Adv Physiol Educ 2009;4:257–264. [34] Kubiatko M, Vaculova I. Project-Based Learning: Characteristic and the Experiences with Application in the Science Subjects. Ener Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;1-2:65–74. [35] Eggert S, Bögeholz S. Students' use of decision-making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the rasch partial credit model. Sci Educ 2010;2:230–258. [36] Evans SM, Gill ME. Schoolchildren as educators: The indirect influence of environmental education in schools on parents' attitudes towards the environment. J Biol Educ 1996;4:243–249. [37] Šorgo A, Usak M, Aydogdu M., Ambrožič-Dolinšek J. Keles O. biology teaching in upper secondary schools: Comparative study between Slovenia and Turkey. Ener Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:305–314. [38] Rutar Ilc Z. Kako poteka pouk v slovenskih gimnazijah? Povzetek najpomembnejših ugotovitev kvantitativne in kvalitativne analize izvajanja pouka v gimnazijah. Vzg Izobr 2005;4-5:58–64. [39] Prah K, Kolenc Kolnik K. didactic analyis of outdoor learning based on the example of the educational water trail in the Sotla River Basin. Didact Slov-Pedagos 2007;3-4:38–52. [40] Alagona PS, Simon GL. The role of field study in humanistic and interdisciplinary environmental education. J Exp Educ 2010;3:191–206. [41] Ozguner H, Cukur D, Akten M. The role of landscape and urban planning disciplines to encourage environmental education among primary school children. Ener Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:369–386. [42] Cotton D. Implementing curriculum guidance on environmental education: the importance of teachers' beliefs. J Curr Stud 2006;1:67–83. [43] Cotton D. Teaching controversial environmental issues: Neutrality and balance in the reality of the classroom. Educ Res 2006;2:223–241. [44] Hatzidiakos D, Ganatsios A, Papavasileiou V. The importance of environmental literacy through an interdisciplinary approach to education. J Environ Prot Ecol 2009;2:590–598. [45] Godemann J. Knowledge Integration: a key challenge for transdisciplinary cooperation. Environ Educ Res 2008;6:625–641. [46] Prokop P, Kubiatko M, Fancovicova J. Slovakian Pupils' knowledge of, and attitudes toward, birds. Anthrozoos 2008;3:221–235. [47] Tomažič, I. Seventh graders' direct experience with, and feelings toward, amphibians and some other nonhuman animals. Soc Anim 2011;3:225–247. [48] Sadler TD, Zeidler D L. Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. J Res Sci Teach 2005;1:12–138. [49] Kose EO. Assessment of context-based learning in biology: a discussion and analysis of learners' individual differences. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:119–130.

1076


4

(2012)

1067-1076

[50] Oztas F. The effects of educational gains of vocational school of health students on their environmental attitudes. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2010;2:147–159. [51] Dikmenli M. Biology students’conceptual structures regarding global warming. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2010;2:21–38. [52] Oztas F, Kalipci E, Bozkurt E. How do biology teacher candidates perceive global climatic change? Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:99–107. [53] Kocakulah MS. Grade 8 students’ conceptual patterns of conservation, transformation and types of energy. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2011;3:153–172. [54] Cetin M. EU education project of effects on auto mechanics in terms of health, safety and environmental sensitivity. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2012;4:87-96. [55] Ozer Keskin M, Salman Akin B, Oner Armagan F, Keskin Samanci N. Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards some environmental problems. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2012;4:97–104. [56] Demirbas A. Social, economic, environmental and policy aspects of biofuels. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2010;2:75–109. [57] Dikmenli M, Cardak O, Oztas F, Yakisan M. High school students’ images of an environmental scientist. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B 2010;2:187–210.