The present study aimed to determine the difference between the environmental attitudes of freshmen and senior students attending Karadeniz Technical University Landscape Architecture Department in Turkey. The study group included 160 freshmen and senior students at KTU Landscape Architecture. A scale developed by Uzun and Sağlam (2000) was employed as the environmental attitude scale. The scale includes 27 items in environmental behavior and environmental thought subscales. The environmental behavior subscale includes 13 items and the environmental thought subscale includes 14 items. The Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the environmental behavior subscale was calculated as 0.855, and the Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the environmental thought subscale was 0.812. Thus, it could be suggested that the scale was valid and reliable. It was determined in the study that the environmental behavior (46.9875) and environmental thought (52.0375) and total environmental attitude scores (99.025) of the senior students were higher when compared to the freshmen (90.3375). "> [PDF] Determination of the difference between environmental attitudes of 1st and 4th year students of landscape architecture | [PDF] Determination of the difference between environmental attitudes of 1st and 4th year students of landscape architecture The present study aimed to determine the difference between the environmental attitudes of freshmen and senior students attending Karadeniz Technical University Landscape Architecture Department in Turkey. The study group included 160 freshmen and senior students at KTU Landscape Architecture. A scale developed by Uzun and Sağlam (2000) was employed as the environmental attitude scale. The scale includes 27 items in environmental behavior and environmental thought subscales. The environmental behavior subscale includes 13 items and the environmental thought subscale includes 14 items. The Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the environmental behavior subscale was calculated as 0.855, and the Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the environmental thought subscale was 0.812. Thus, it could be suggested that the scale was valid and reliable. It was determined in the study that the environmental behavior (46.9875) and environmental thought (52.0375) and total environmental attitude scores (99.025) of the senior students were higher when compared to the freshmen (90.3375). ">

Determination of the difference between environmental attitudes of 1st and 4th year students of landscape architecture

Determination of the difference between environmental attitudes of 1st and 4th year students of landscape architecture

The present study aimed to determine the difference between the environmental attitudes of freshmen and senior students attending Karadeniz Technical University Landscape Architecture Department in Turkey. The study group included 160 freshmen and senior students at KTU Landscape Architecture. A scale developed by Uzun and Sağlam (2000) was employed as the environmental attitude scale. The scale includes 27 items in environmental behavior and environmental thought subscales. The environmental behavior subscale includes 13 items and the environmental thought subscale includes 14 items. The Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the environmental behavior subscale was calculated as 0.855, and the Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the environmental thought subscale was 0.812. Thus, it could be suggested that the scale was valid and reliable. It was determined in the study that the environmental behavior (46.9875) and environmental thought (52.0375) and total environmental attitude scores (99.025) of the senior students were higher when compared to the freshmen (90.3375).

___

  • Akıllı, M., & Genç, M. (2015). Examination of middle school students’ subdimensions of environmental literacy in terms of various variables. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 5(2), 81-97.
  • Alnıaçık, Ögdü, & Koç, Ö. G. F. (2009). Yeni Çevresel Paradigma Ölçeği İle Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Çevreye Yönelik Tutumlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Bölgesel Kalkınma Kongresi, 14-16.
  • Alnıaçık, Ü. (2010). Çevreci yönelim, çevre dostu davranış ve demografik özellikler: üniversite öğrencileri üzerinde bir araştırma. Selçuk Üniversitesi Dergisi, 10(20); 507-532.
  • Alpak, E. M., Özkan, D. G., & Düzenli, T. (2018). Systems approach in landscape design: a studio work. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(2), 593-611.
  • Alpak, E. M., Düzenli, T., & Mumcu, S. (2020). Raising awareness of seating furniture design in landscape architecture education: physical, activity-use and meaning dimensions. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1-25.
  • Altınöz, N. (2010). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının çevre okuryazarlık düzeyleri. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Sakarya.
  • Aydın, M. (2000). Eğitim yönetimi. Ankara: Hatiboğlu Yayınevi.
  • Ayvaz, Z. (1998). Çevre eğitiminde temel kavramlar el kitabı. İzmir: Çevre Koruma ve Araştırma Vakfı, Çevre Eğitim Merkezi Yayınları, (5).
  • Aznar-Díaz, I., Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., Cáceres-Reche, M. P., Trujillo-Torres, J. M., & Romero-Rodríguez, J. M. (2019). Environmental Attitudes in Trainee Teachers in Primary Education. The Future of Biodiversity Preservation and Environmental Pollution. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(3), 362.
  • Batavia, C., Bruskotter, J. K., & Nelson, M. P. (2019). Pathways from Environmental Ethics to Pro-Environmental Behaviours? Insights from Psychology. Environmental Values.
  • Baur, J. W., Ries, P., & Rosenberger, R. S. (2019). A relationship between emotional connection to nature and attitudes about urban forest management. Urban Ecosystems, 1-11.
  • Bayramoğlu, E., Büyükkurt, U., & Yurdakul, N. M. (2019). Peyzaj Mimarlığı Eğitiminde Proje Tasarım Süreci: Trabzon “Karagöz Meydanı” Çevre Tasarım Projeleri. Social Sciences, 14(1), 15-24.
  • Bell, P. A., Green, T., Fisher, J. D., & Baum, A. (2001). Environmental Psychology. New Jersey.
  • Berkes, F., & Kışlalıoğlu, M. (1993). Ekoloji ve çevre bilimi. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
  • Berto, R. (2019). Our wellbeing in modern built environments is rooted in our evolutionary history. Are we aware of this?. Visions for Sustainability, 11:3-8.
  • Bozkurt, O., & Aydoğdu, M. (2004). İlköğretim 6., 7. ve 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin “ozon tabakası ve görevleri” hakkındaki kavram yanılgıları ve oluşturma şekilleri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 12(2), 369-376.
  • Bozkurt, O., & Cansüngü, Ö. (2002). Primary school students’ misconceptions about Greenhouse effect in environment education. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 23, 67-73.
  • Cao, H., & Chen, Z. (2019). The driving effect of internal and external environment on green innovation strategy- The moderating role of top management’s environmental awareness. Nankai Business Review International, 10(3), 342-361.
  • Capra, F. (2009). The new facts of life: Connecting the dots on food, health, and the environment. Public Library Quarterly, 28(3), 242-248.
  • Cattaneo, T., Giorgi, E., & Ni, M. (2019). Landscape, Architecture and Environmental Regeneration: A Research by Design Approach for Inclusive Tourism in a Rural Village in China. Sustainability, 11(1), 128.
  • Cavanna, A. (2019). How can the replacement of public lots with planted green spaces promote environmental awareness and encourage social involvement in Long Beach, NY.
  • Çabuk, B., & Karacaoğlu, C. (2003). Examination of Sensitivity of University Students. Ankara Univ. Edu. Sci. Faculty Mag, 36(1-2), 189-198.
  • Çelik, S. (2019). Hızlı Şehirleşmenin Doğurduğu Sorunlar Ve Çözüm Yolları. Journal of International Social Research, 12(62).
  • Çetin, T., Turan, M. E., Aytekin, P., & Yurdusev, M. A. (2020). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Çevresel Yaklaşımlarını Ölçmeye Yönelik Bir Araştırma: Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Örneği. Doğal Afetler ve Çevre Dergisi, 6(1), 1-12.
  • Çınar, B., Duran, A., & Taştan, H. (2019). Sosyal İstenirliğin Çevreci Duyarlılık, Tutum ve Davranışlar Üzerindeki Etkisi; Doğa. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 1727, 1736.
  • Çorbacı, Ö. L., Abay G., Oğuztürk, T., & Üçok M. (2020) Kentsel Rekreasyonel Alanlardaki Bitki Varlığı; Rize Örneği/ Plant Existence in Urban Recreational Areas; Rize Example. Düzce Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Ormancılık Dergisi, 16(2), 16-44.
  • Demirel, M., Gürbüz, B., & Karaküçük, S. (2009). Rekreasyonel Aktivitelere Katılımın Çevreye Yönelik Tutum Üzerindeki Etkisi Ve Yeni Ekolojik Paradigma Ölçeği’nin Geçerliği Ve Güvenirliği. Spormetre Beden Eğitimi Ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 47-50.
  • Diekmann, A., & Franzen, A. (2019). Environmental concern: A global perspective. In Einstellungen und Verhalten in der empirischen Sozialforschung (pp. 253-272). Springer VS, Wiesbaden.
  • Dinavasova, J. (2019). Bireylerin çevresel tutumlarının sürdürülebilir tüketim davranışına etkisi üzerine bir araştırma. Dinçer M. Çevre gönüllü kuruluşları. Ankara: Türkiye Çevre Vakfı Yayını; 1996.
  • Dunlap, R. E. (2008). The new environmental paradigm scale: From marginality to worldwide use. The Journal of environmental education, 40(1), 3-18.
  • Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of social issues, 56(3), 425-442.
  • Duzenli, T., Alpak, E. M., & Yilmaz, S. (2019). Chıldren’s Imagınatıons About Envıronment and Theır Perceptıons on Envıronmental Problems. Fresenıus Envıronmental Bulletın, 28(12 A), 9798-9808.
  • Düzenli, T., Yılmaz, S., & Alpak, E. M. (2018). Peyzaj Mimarlığı Eğitiminde Bir Tasarım Yaklaşımı: Doğal Örüntülerden Esinlenme. SED-Sanat Eğitimi Dergisi, 1:21-35.
  • Eisenhart, A. C., Crews Meyer, K. A., King, B., & Young, K. R. (2019). Environmental Perception, Sense of Place, and Residence Time in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. The Professional Geographer, 71(1), 109-122.
  • Erbasan, Ö., & Erkol, M. (2020). Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Çevreye Yönelik Bilgi, Tutum ve Davranış Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 16(24), 1-1.
  • Erdoğan, E. (2006). Çevre ve kent estetiği. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(9), 68-77.
  • Erdoğan, M. (2011). Ekoloji temelli yaz doğa eğitimi programının ilköğretim öğrencilerinin çevreye yönelik bilgi, duyuşsal eğilimler ve sorumlu davranışlarına etkisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 11(4), 2223- 2237.
  • Eroğlu, E.; Kaya, S.; Dogan, T.G.; Meral, A.; Demirci, S.; Başaran, N.; Corbaci, O.L. Determination of the Visual Preferences of Different Habitat Types. FEB, 2018, 2018070243 (doi: 10.20944/preprints201807.0243.v1).
  • Ertürk, Ö.G.İ.E., Uçar, U.M., Yıldırım, M.N., Karaman, A., & Ertekin, S. (2017). Öğrencilerin Çevre Duyarlılığının Eko-Girişimcilik Eğilimleri Üzerine Etkisi, Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(63):526-538.
  • Gage, R., & Graefe, D. (2019). Campus conservation initiatives: factors influencing student engagement, attitudes and behaviours. International Journal of Higher Education and Sustainability, 2(3), 197-215.
  • Gatersleben, B. (2018). Measuring environmental behaviour. Environmental psychology: An introduction, 155-166.
  • Gazeloğlu, C. (2019). Akademisyenlerin Çevresel Davranışlarının İstatistiksel Yöntemlerle Belirlenmesi. Journal of Social Sciences/Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (31).
  • Gifford, R. (2014). Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology, 65, 541-579.
  • Güzelyurt, T., & Özkan, Ö. (2019). Environmental Education in Pre- School Period: An Examination of Children’s Books. Elementary Education Online, 18(1), 20-30.
  • Henkel, C., Seidler, A. R., Kranz, J., & Fiedler, M. (2019). How To Nudge Pro-Envıronmental Behavıour: An Experımental Study. In Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Stockholm & Uppsala, Sweden, June 8-14, 2019. ISBN 978-1-7336325-0-8 Research Papers
  • Hong, C. Y., Chang, H., & Chung, E. S. (2019). Comparing the functional recognition of aesthetics, hydrology, and quality in urban stream restoration through the framework of environmental perception. River Research and Applications, 35(6), 543-552.
  • Huang, Y., Wang, J., & Yang, S. (2019, April). Research and Analysis on How to Improve the Awareness of Environmental Protection. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (252(3): 032-035). IOP Publishing.
  • Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The journal of environmental education, 21(3), 8-21.
  • İnceoğlu, M. (2004), Tutum, Algı, İletişim (1. Baskı). Ankara: Elips Yayınları
  • Janmaimool, P., & Khajohnmanee, S. (2019). Roles of Environmental System Knowledge in Promoting University Students’ Environmental Attitudes and Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Sustainability, 11(16), 4270.
  • Kahyaoğlu, M. (2013). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin zekâ alanları ile çevreye yönelik tutumları arasındaki ilişkinin değerlendirilmesi.
  • Kang, Y., & Kim, E. J. (2019). Differences of Restorative Effects While Viewing Urban Landscapes and Green Landscapes. Sustainability, 11(7), 2129.
  • Kaplan, S. (2016). Cognitive maps, human needs and the designed environment 5.4. Environmental Design Research: Volume one selected papers, 275.
  • Kaya, E., Akilli, M., & Sezek, F. (2009). An investigation of high school students’ environmental attitudes in terms of gender. Mehmet Akif University Journal of Education, 9, 43-54.
  • Keleş, R., Çoban, A. & Hamamcı C. (2009). Çevre Politikası. Ankara: İmge Yayıncılık.
  • Kışoğlu, M., Yıldırım, T., Salman, M., & Sülün, A. (2016). İlkokul ve ortaokullarda çevre eğitimi verecek olan öğretmen adaylarında çevre sorunlarına yönelik davranışların araştırılması. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 299-318.
  • Kıyıcı, F. B., Yiğit, E. A., & Darçın, E. S. (2014). Doğa eğitimi ile öğretmen adaylarının çevre okuryazarlık düzeylerindeki değişimin ve görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(1), 17-27.
  • Kızgın, Y., Karaosmanoğlu, K., Okulu, M. M. Y., Örmeci, G., & Özlem, T. A. Ş. (2017). Tüketicilerin Sürdürülebilir Tüketim Bağlamında Yeşil Tüketim Eğilimleri Ve Demografik Özelliklere Göre Farklılıkları. Proceedıngs Book, 762.
  • Kiessling, T., Salas, S., Mutafoglu, K., & Thiel, M. (2017). Who cares about dirty beaches? Evaluating environmental awareness and action on coastal litter in Chile. Ocean & coastal management, 137, 82-95.
  • Kiper, T. (2014). Peyzaj Mimarlığı Öğrencilerinin Çevre Tutumlarının Belirlenmesi Determination of Environmental Attitudes of Students of Landscape Architecture. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 80-88.
  • Lindquist, M., Lange, E., & Kang, J. (2016). From 3D landscape visualization to environmental simulation: The contribution of sound to the perception of virtual environments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 148, 216- 231.
  • Menatti, L., Subiza-Pérez, M., Villalpando- Flores, A., Vozmediano, L., & San Juan, C. (2019). Place attachment and identification as predictors of expected landscape restorativeness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 63, 36-43.
  • Nikologianni, A., Moore, K., & Larkham, P. J. (2019). Making Sustainable Regional Design Strategies Successful. Sustainability, 11(4), 1024.
  • Oğuz, D., Çakcı, I., & Kavas, S. (2011). Environmental awareness of students in higher education. Türkiye Ormancılık Dergisi, 12(1), 34-39.
  • Özcan, H., & Arık, S. (2019). Çevre Kirliliğine Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışmaları. Igdir University Journal of Social Sciences, (17).
  • Özey, R. (2009). Çevre Sorunları, Aktif Yayıncılık, 3. Baskı, İstanbul.
  • Özgüner, H., Eraslan, Ş., & Yilmaz, S.(2012). Public perception of landscape restoration along a degraded urban streamside. Land Degradation & Development, 23(1), 24-33.
  • Özgüven, İ. E. (1998). Psikolojik Testler. Ankara: Pdrem Yayınları.
  • Özhancı, E., & Yılmaz, H. (2015). Doğa Sevgisi Değeri (Doğayı Koruma ve Doğadan Yararlanma) ve Peyzaj Mimarlığı Eğitimi. Namık kemal üniversiteleri dergileri Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(1).
  • Pelstring, L. (1997). Measuring environmental attitudes: the new environmental paradigm. Human Dimensions Research Unit, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
  • Prior, J. (2017). Sonic environmental aesthetics and landscape research. Landscape research, 42(1), 6-17.
  • Purwanti, D., & Musadad, A. A. (2019). The Effect of Local-Based 2013 Curriculum Implementation on Students’ Environmental Awareness. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 4(1), 65-75.
  • Saban, A. (2002). Çoklu Zekâ Teorisi ve Eğitim. Ankara: Nobel Yayın ve Dağıtım.
  • Sadik, F., & Çakan, H. (2010). Biyoloji Bölümü Öğrencilerinin Çevre Bilgisi Ve Çevre Sorunlarına Yönelik Tutum Düzeyleri. Journal of the Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, 19(1).
  • Selim, S., Karakuş, N., Elkan, S., & Selim, C. (2011). Meslek yüksekokulu öğrencilerinin çevre sorunlarına ilişkin görüş ve tutumlarının değerlendirilmesi: Ortaca Meslek Yüksekokulu örneği. SDÜ Orman Fakültesi Dergisi SDU, 12, 148-154.
  • Sever, R., & Yalcinkaya, E. (2012). Examining the environmental attitudes of pre-service teachers on primary school teaching. Marmara Geographical Review, (26), 1-15.
  • Shang, H., Lin, M., & Zheng, Y. (2019, July). The Perception Reshaping Strategy of Campus Public Space. In International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (381- 391). Springer, Cham.
  • Smith, J. W. (2015). Immersive virtual environment technology to supplement environmental perception, preference and behavior research: a review with applications. International journal of environmental research and public health, 12(9), 11486-11505.
  • Stanley, S. K., & Wilson, M. S. (2019). Meta-analysing the association between social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, and attitudes on the environment and climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 61, 46-56.
  • Steg, L., van den Berg, A. E., & de Groot, J. I. (2018). Environmental Psychology: History, Scope, and Methods. Environmental psychology: an introduction, 1-11.
  • Stenfors, C. U. D., Van Hedgere, S. C., Schertz, K. E., Meyer, F., Smith, K. E., Norman, G., ... & Berman, M. G. (2019). Positive effects of nature on cognitive performance across multiple experiments: Test order but not affect modulates the cognitive effects. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1413.
  • Strack, M., Shephard, K., Jowett, T., Mogford, S., Skeaff, S., & Mirosa, M. (2019). Monitoring surveying students’ environmental attitudes as they experience higher education in New Zealand. Survey Review, 51(366), 257-264.
  • Tarakçı, E. E., Alpak, M. E., Düzenli T. (2018). Mevsimsel Bitki Görünümlerinin Tercih Ve Algısal Farklılıklarının Belirlenmesi. Uluslararası Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 3(1), 145-154.
  • Torres-Lima, P., Conway-Gómez, K., & Buentello-Sánchez, R. (2018). Socio-Environmental Perception of an Urban Wetland and Sustainability Scenarios: a Case Study in Mexico City. Wetlands, 38(1), 169-181.
  • Tuncer, G., Ertepinar, H., Tekkaya, C., & Sungur, S. (2005). Environmental attitudes of young people in Turkey: Effects of school type and gender. Environmental Education Research, 11(2), 215-233.
  • Turkistani, F. N. (2019). Tüketicilerin çevresel tutumlarının çevre dostu ürün satın alma davranışları üzerinde etkisinin incelenmesine yönelik bir araştırma. Marmara Üniversitesi Tezi.
  • Türk A. (1998). Çevre nedir?. Kıvanç M ve Yücel E, editörler. Çevre ve insan. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları; 1-12.
  • Uzun, N., & Sağlam, N. (2006). Orta öğretim öğrencileri için çevresel tutum ölçeği geliştirme ve geçerliliği. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(30), 240-250.
  • Van Hedger, S. C., Nusbaum, H. C., Clohisy, L., Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., & Berman, M. G. (2019). Of cricket chirps and car horns: The effect of nature sounds on cognitive performance. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 26(2), 522-530.
  • Wallner, P., Kundi, M., Arnberger, A., Eder, R., Allex, B., Weitensfelder, L., & Hutter, H. P. (2018). Reloading pupils’ batteries: Impact of green spaces on cognition and wellbeing. International Journal Of Environmental Research And Public Health, 15(6), 1205.
  • Yıldız, K., Sipahioğlu, Ş., & Yılmaz, M. (2000). Environmental Science. Gündüz Education and Publishing, Ankara, 104-114.
  • Yılmaz, A., Morgil, F. İ., Aktuğ, P., & Göbekli, İ. (2002). Ortaöğretim ve üniversite öğrencilerinin çevre, çevra kavramları, ve sorunları konusundaki bilgileri ve öneriler. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(22).
  • Yücel, M., Altunkasa, F., Güçray, S., Uslu, C., Say, N. P., & Say, N. P. (2006). Adana’da Çevre Duyarlılığı Düzeyinin Ve Geliştirme Olanaklarının Araştırılması. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 217-228.
A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 2564-7474
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 3 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2005
  • Yayıncı: İTÜ Rektörlüğü