Environmentally Charged Curriculum




Environmentally Charged Curriculum:
How Teachers Can Make Connections
Nicole Weber, PhD Candidate
University of Massachusetts Boston

“The public’s new found environmental commitment is based on emotion… not facts.”
Barry Cullen, American Forest and Paper Association President (1992)
When creating a curriculum about the environment, an educator needs to understand local attitudes, common misconceptions, and how to promote the most effective learning environment for the curriculum to be successful (National Research Council 2000, Knudson et. al. 1995, Adeniyi 1985). For any curriculum, or environmental presentation, such as a speech, tour or diorama, one first needs to become familiar with the needs and attitudes of the audience. People rarely receive all the information presented, and many may only take in a small portion, so messages need to be persuasive and aware of local opinion (Knudson et. al. 1995). Along these same lines, knowing common misconceptions your audience will likely have can aid in the selection and the organization of the intended learning outcomes. Adding a first hand experience may also challenge students to restructure prior ideas (Adeniyi 1985). Finally, designing an effective learning environment is critical to the students’ understanding of specific real world issues (National Research Council 2000).

In order to structure an environmental curriculum program, one first needs to look at what influences local attitudes, and how the public perceives their role in protecting the environment. Current trends observed in census polling data can be one avenue of obtaining this type of information. For example, a national survey on public attitudes toward the National Marine Sanctuaries and ocean protected areas, administered in October of 1999 to 800 adult Americans, shows there is a high interest in the health of the oceans, with an 87% majority saying the condition of the ocean matter to them personally (Mellman Group 1999). Eighty percent of the respondents believe humans can do lasting damage to the oceans, however, only 55% feel that their personal actions have an impact on the ocean’s health (Figure 1). This may be due to there being general confusion about the reef system, such as how resources are distributed or the potential impact of pollution. For example, four out of ten respondents believed that fish breeding grounds and coral reefs are found throughout the ocean, and not specific to certain areas (Mellman Group 1999, and SeaWeb 2004).

The Gallup Poll on Environmental Issues also shows that overall environmental concerns have decreased from 1999 to 2001, with an average of only one in four adult respondents being “worried” about environmental issues presented (Table 1) . The Mellman Group stated that pollution was still seen as the leading problem by respondents, with 83% ranking oil spills as the number one issue. Seventy-nine % of those polled felt the second leading concern was the runoff of chemicals and pesticides from large corporate farms, and 75% saw chemical run-off from streets as the third most important problem (Mellman Group 1999). Contrary to the respondents’ beliefs, a recent National Academy of Science study estimates that the oil running off our streets and driveways into the oceans over, an eight month time period is equal to an Exxon Valdez oil spill. In addition, the amount of manure from animal feed lots is three times the amount of sanitary waste produced by the human population (Pew Oceans Commission 2003). This makes surface runoff, sewage, and habitat loss the target issues. However, these misconceptions may be due to the fact that little information is actually presented to the public (Table 2), with only 12% responding that they have heard about the harm done to the environment with certain types of fishing practices (Sea Food Choices Alliance 2003).


Personal lack of experience must also underlie misconceptions about the environment and the personal relevance of conservation. As a conservation biologist, as my knowledge of where natural resources originate grows, I develop a more intricate image of the environment around me. I realize that the resources moving in and out of my “habitat” could be coming from a small village across the globe, although this was not always evident to me. I now take into consideration interactions between these resources within the local food web: how matter circulates, the general effect of pollution, and roll of decay. Now at 33 years of age, I realize that this is a unique global outlook. Children that live in a small village in Honduras or an apartment in Boston likely do not realize how interconnected the world really is, on a local ecosystem level or a global level.

Habitat alteration by human activity is the leading cause of global biodiversity loss, and is turning the environmental conservation solution into a more long-term cultural and community-orientated obligation (Meffe and Carroll 1997). However, research has found that key ideas such as ecology, evolution, and inheritance can often be problematic for students to grasp and deeply understand (Leach et. al. 1996a and b, Wood-Robinson 1995, Driver et al. 1994, Adeniyi 1985). This is problematic, as each of these key concepts can be found at the center of understanding ecological relationships and found essential to scientists’ conceptual reasoning.

Although a general scientific definition of ecology, evolution, and inheritance is in almost any dictionary, the very words themselves may have a different meaning for a middle school student than a scientist. The scientist envisions the interactions and relationships between organisms and their environment (food webs and matter recycling), while the student may picture the Greenpeace banner and other “green” issues for conserving the environment (Wood-Robinson 1995). As a cornerstone to modern biology, evolution has allowed scientists to classify organisms according to structure and function, and yet students may only see a disconnected past where animals are “willing to change” in response to the oscillating environment (Wood-Robinson 1995). Inheritance is understood by scientists to be the transfer of genetic from one generation to the next. A middle school student may not fully understand that inherited changes in a population over time are not the same as changes one may experience over their own lifetime (Wood-Robinson 1995, Driver et. al. 1994). If students are having difficulty understanding such key concepts, where can science education go to connect these students to real life situations that surround them?

We can begin by providing an effective learning environment through the use of four distinct perspectives, or environmental foci; the learner, the knowledge objective, the assessment, and the community. First, a learner centered environment focuses on what the “student brings to the table”, including their conceptual and cultural knowledge (National Research Council 2000). For the learner, one needs to keep in mind the intrinsic, environmental, and communication barriers that could inhibit participation. The intrinsic barriers include the cognitive abilities of the learner, as well as the physical and social or cultural limitations. Environmental barriers include local attitudes that set learners apart, architectural barriers that make it difficult for some learners to have access, and natural obstacles (i.e. hills, snow, etc.) that can also be present. In addition, communication barriers are also important when considering the learner, like audio and visual obstacles students may have. For an overall effective learner centered program, one should include the cognitive, the emotional or affective, and the kinesthetic domains of learning (Knudson et. al. 1995).

Some examples worth noting are those related to age and local cultural differences. Social limitations, and associated social pressures, that a teenager may experience from their peers, can hinder learning even though his or her mind has reached its peak of comprehending complexities. Research on Hispanics and African-Americans suggests some areas of cultural differences that need to be considered. For both groups, interaction with family and friends is extremely important when participating in an activity. Hispanics have local differences in translation that have to be considered when creating curriculum materials. African-Americans often prefer self-guided exploration, hands-on exhibits, and can have a strong orientation toward urban parks. Also among minorities, environmental concern may be less critical than their concern for more urgent survival and acceptance issues, such as poverty and discrimination. (Knudson et. al. 1995).

Secondly, having the knowledge objective as the center of the learning environment focuses on learning the big ideas that the student needs to acquire and fully understand through learning activities that promote transfer of knowledge (National Research Council 2000). The curriculum should also have a genus loci or theme as the learning objective, so the learner walks away with the main point of message of the lesson (Knudson et. al. 1995, Ham 1992). Studies have shown that the main ideas should be kept to 5 ± 2, if your learners are unfamiliar with the subject, as on average, humans are only capable of making sense of 7 ± 2 new ideas at one time (Ham 1992). For the environmental curriculum materials to best support students learning the content, the unit is recommended to have: A sense of purpose, consist of relevant phenomenon, develop and support science ideas, give feedback, promote reflection, and take students’ misconceptions and working ideas into account; according to the Project 2061’s curriculum analysis (Kesidou and Roseman 2002). Knowledge of the issue itself and action strategies needed, are two of the variables found to be associated with motivating individuals to take responsible environmental action, and should be considered for a learning objective of an environmental issue. Each of these can be addressed through a curriculum including issue identification, issue investigation, and action taking approaches (Hines et. al. 1986, 1987).

Thirdly, centering the learning environment around the assessment can allow the student to receive repeated opportunities for feedback and revision of their work (grades, tests, papers), and should include both a peer and a self-assessment experience. Feedback is fundamental, as it allows a student to revise their thinking while working (alone or in a group), and the formative assessment aids in learning the information and being able to transfer that knowledge to different applications (National Research Council 2000). A way of extending this assessment is by having the students rate their own work and compare this with the teacher’s evaluation, to see if the student’s understanding of the criteria is clear (White and Frederiksen 2000).

Lastly, the community environment is where a sense of community is formed between the learners involved (National Research Council 2000). This means becoming familiar with the obstacles of the classroom environment, and the materials that are locally available. Where possible, include traditional songs and events, ask local speakers (for example, nurses, clergy, farmers) to participate, and target locally accessible natural areas to be introduced into the curriculum. Although limited time has been one of the overriding barriers for environmental education (Ham 1992), teachers can be willing participate if they are provided with time to plan within the program itself, that will not take away from their daily obligations within the school. This way the local teachers are deciding what environmental elements are important and appropriate to include, while having the background knowledge of the underlying curriculum.

In conclusion, when creating an environmental curriculum, begin with the understanding of local needs and attitudes. One can achieve this through looking at national or local polls, sitting down with a discussion group, or interviewing a few local leaders. Then, take a look at the common misconceptions students have about the target-learning objective, either through reading current research, or by asking a group of students that are the same age as the proposed audience. Organize the intended learning objectives, and try not to present too much information to students at one time. Lastly, promote an effective learning environment, by centering your curriculum on one of the four perspectives or by trying to include all four (the learner, the knowledge objective, assessment, and community).

Conserving the environment is about placing value on the natural resources that sustain us, and for the last ten years there has been a dramatic reduction in day-to-day contact with the natural world. Few children are incorporating plants, animals, or outdoor places into their sense of home as they are growing up, and may only experience “nature” through a trip to the local park or theme park (Ehrenfeld 1997). So, smile and have fun with the material, because if the presentation is too “academic,” the audience will probably not pay attention (Ham 1992).These children are the next generation of policy makers, and we need to make an impression of how important conservation is. Roll up your sleeves and dive in, their understanding is in your hands.

References:
Adeniyi, E. (1985) Misconceptions of Selected Ecological Concepts Held by Some Nigerian Students. Journal of Biological
Education, 19 (4), 311-316.
Driver, R., A. Squires, P. Rushworth, and V. Wood-Robinson (1994) Making Sense of Secondary Education: Research into Children’s Ideas. New York: Routledge/Falmer of the Taylor and Francis Group. pp. 59-69.
Ehrenfeld, David (1997) Conservation Biology in the 21^st Century. In: Principles of Conservation Biology. Gary K.
Meffe and C. Ronald Carroll eds. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc. pp. 646-647.
Ham, Sam H. (1992) Environmental Interpretation: A Practical Guide for People with Big Ideas and Small
Budgets. Golden, CO: North American Press. pp.6; 19-23; 192.
Hines, J. M., H.R. Hungerford, and A. N. Tomera (1986,1987) Analysis and synthesis of research
on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education. 18(2): 1-8.
Kesidou,S. and J.E. Roseman (2002) How Well Do Middel School Science Programs Measure Up? Findings from
Project 2061’s Curriculum Review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 39 (6) pp. 522-549.
Knudson, Douglas M., Cable, Ted T., and Larry Beck. (1995) Interpretation of Cultural and Natural Resources.
State College, PA: Venture Publishing. pp. 110-125, 166-171
Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., and C. Wood-Robinson (1996a) Children's ideas about ecology 2: Ideas found in
children aged 5-16 about the cycling of matter. International Journal of Science Education. pp. 19-34.
Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., and C. Wood-Robinson (1996b) Children's ideas about ecology 3: Ideas found in
children aged 5-16 about the interdependency of organisms. International Journal of Science Education. (pp. 129-141).
Meffe, Gary K and Ronald Carroll (1997) Principles of Conservation Biology. Gary K. Meffe and C. Ronald
Caroll eds. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc. pp. 3-26, 269.
Mellman Group (1999) SeaWeb Poll. pp. 1-4.
National Research Council (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press. pp. 131-149.
Pew Oceans Commission (2003) America’s Living Ocean: Charting a Course for Sea Change Summary
Report. http://www.pewoceans.org/oceans/downloads/oceans_summary.pdf.
Seafood Choices Polling Information (2003) http://www.seafoodchoices.com/pdf/SCA_report_final.pdf
SeaWeb (2001) Ocean Attitudes 2001: Conservation through Consumer Action. AAAS Survey Report 2001.
http://www.aaas.org/international/africa/coralreefs/ppt/ppt01.html
White, B. and Frederiksen, J. (2000) Metacognitive Facilitation: An Approach to making Scientific Inquiry
Accessible to All. In: Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science. Minstrell, Jim and van Zee,
Emily, Eds. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. pp. 331-370.
Wood-Robinson, C. (1995) Children's Biological Ideas: Knowledge about Ecology, Inheritance, and Evolution. In:
Learning Science in the Schools: Research Reforming Practice. Glynn and Duit, Eds. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates. pp. 111-130.