0.05) in terms of environmental knowledge. However, environmental behaviors of 'Environmental Health Program' students differs (t=2.039, p< 0.05) from the 'Social Science Education' students. Students who had taken environmental lectures are found behaving more environmentally way (mean 1.300) than the others (mean 1.178). Additionally, it is found that gender did not differ significantly from each other in environmental knowledge (t=1.290, p>0.05) Therefore a specificimportance should be given to 'environmental education' in schools to promote environmentally responsible individuals. "> [PDF] The Effectiveness of Environmental Education on Environmentally-Sensitive Behaviors | [PDF] Çevre Eğitiminin Çevreye Duyarlı Davranışlar Üzerindeki Etkisi 0.05) in terms of environmental knowledge. However, environmental behaviors of 'Environmental Health Program' students differs (t=2.039, p< 0.05) from the 'Social Science Education' students. Students who had taken environmental lectures are found behaving more environmentally way (mean 1.300) than the others (mean 1.178). Additionally, it is found that gender did not differ significantly from each other in environmental knowledge (t=1.290, p>0.05) Therefore a specificimportance should be given to 'environmental education' in schools to promote environmentally responsible individuals. ">

The Effectiveness of Environmental Education on Environmentally-Sensitive Behaviors

Bu çalışmada, 'çevre' konularında eğitim gören üniversite öğrencilerinin, çevre ve doğa korunmasına ilişkin teorik derslerde edindikleri bilgileri, davranışlarına aktarıp aktaramadıkları, yani sahip oldukları 'çevre bilgisi' ile gösterdikleri 'çevreci davranışlar' arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığı araştırılmıştır. Ayrıca, sosyodemografik parametrelere bir örnek olarak 'cinsiyet'in çevre bilgisi ve çevreci davranış üzerindeki etkileri ölçülmüştür. Bu amaçla, çevre bilgisini ve çevreci davranışları ölçen, iki farklı bölümden oluşan anket formu çevre alanında eğitim alan, Gazi Üniversitesi, Sağlık Hizmetleri Meslek Yüksek Okulu, Çevre Sağlığı Programı öğrencilerine ve kontrol amaçlı Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Sosyal Bilgiler Bölümü öğrencilerine uygulanmıştır. Anketlerin değerlendirilmesi sonucunda, çevre alanında eğitim alan ve almayan öğrenciler arasında 'çevre bilgisi' alanında, istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunamamıştır (t=0.652, p> 0.05). Ancak, Çevre Sağlığı öğrencilerinin, çevreci davranışlar göstermek konusunda daha duyarlı oldukları, çevreyi koruyan davranış kalıplarını daha fazla uyguladıkları, istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir şekilde ortaya konmuştur (t=2.039, p< 0.05). Yapılan çalışmada, cinsiyetin, çevre bilgisi ve çevreci davranışlar üzerinde etkili bir faktör olmadığı ortaya çıkmış, cinsiyetler arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır. Sonuç olarak, öğrencilere neden çevreyi korumak gerektiği ve çevre sorunlarının önemi yeterince kavratıldığmda, pozitif davranışlar sergileyebilmektedirler. Dolayısıyla, eğitimin her boyutunda, "çevre eğitimi" alanına özel bir önem verilmelidir.

Çevre Eğitiminin Çevreye Duyarlı Davranışlar Üzerindeki Etkisi

The main purpose of this study is to measure the environmental knowledge and behaviors of university students who are subjected to environmental courses during their education and to check if there exists a relationship between those two variables namely, environmental knowledge and behavior. For this purpose, a questionnaire with two parts; part one, for the measurement of environmental knowledge and part two, for the measurement of environmental behaviors was applied to Gazi University, Vocational School of Health Services, Environmental Health Program students who are subjected to environmental courses during their training and to Ankara University, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Social Sciences Education students as a control group who are not given any environmental lecture. The interpretation of results indicated that there is no statistically important difference among students (t=0.652, p>0.05) in terms of environmental knowledge. However, environmental behaviors of 'Environmental Health Program' students differs (t=2.039, p< 0.05) from the 'Social Science Education' students. Students who had taken environmental lectures are found behaving more environmentally way (mean 1.300) than the others (mean 1.178). Additionally, it is found that gender did not differ significantly from each other in environmental knowledge (t=1.290, p>0.05) Therefore a specificimportance should be given to 'environmental education' in schools to promote environmentally responsible individuals.

___

  • Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliff, NJ:Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  • Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes personality and behavior. Chicago, IL: The Dorsey Press.
  • Arcury,T.A., Johnson, T.P., and Scollay, S.J.(1986). Ecological worldview and environmental knowledge: The "New Environmental Paradigm". Journal of Environmental Education ,17', 35-40.
  • Amelang, M., Tepe, K., Vagt, G. & Wendt, W. (1977). Reporting about some steps of development of a scale for measuring environmental concern, Diagnostica, 23, 86-88.
  • Arbuthnot, J. (1977). The Roles of Attitudinal and Personality Variables in the Prediction of Environmental Behavior and Knowledge, Environment and Behavior, 9(2), 217-232
  • Cassidy, T. (1997). Environmental Psychology: Behavior and experience in context. UK: Psychology Press.
  • De Chano, L.M., (2006). A multi-country examination of the relationship between environmental knowledge and attitudes, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 15, (15-28).
  • Dispoto, R.G. (1977). Moral Valuing and Environmental Variables, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 4, 273-80.
  • Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., and Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, (425-442).
  • Furman, A. (1998). A note on environmental concern in a developing country. Results from an Istanbul survey. Environment & Behavior, 30, (520-534).
  • Hardin, G. (1991). Paramount positions in ecological economics, Ecological economics: The science and management of sustainability, Ed: R. Constanza, New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., and Tomera, A. N. (1986-87). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environ. Education, 18,1-8.
  • Hines, J.M. (1986-87). Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible Environmental Behavior: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), p1-8.
  • Hsu; S. J. (1997). An assessment of environmental literacy and analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behavior held by secondary teachers in Hualien County of Taiwan. Doctoral Thesis. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
  • Ignatow, G. (2005). Economic dependency and environmental attitudes in Turkey. Environmental Politics, 14, (648-666). Environmental Education, 15, (15-28).
  • Ivy, T. G.-C, Lee, C. K.-E., and Chuan, G. K. (1998). A survey of environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of students in Singapore. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 7(3), 181-202.
  • Krause, D. (1993). Environmental Consciousness, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 1,126-142
  • Loges, W. E., Kidder, R. M. (2000). Reaching Out: Broadening College-Student Constituencies for Environmental Protection. Camden, ME: The Institute for Global Ethics.
  • Maloney, M. P., Ward, M. P. (1973). Ecology: Let's hear from the people. An objective scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge. American Psychologist, 28, (583-586).
  • Maloney, M. P., Ward, M. P., and G. N. Braucht. (1975). Psychology in action, a revised scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge, American Psychologist, 30, (787-790).
  • Milfont, T. L. and Duckitt, J. (2006). Preservation and utilization: Understanding the structure of Environmental Attitudes. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 7, 29-50.
  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems & Human Well-being: Synthesis Report, Washington DC: Island Press.
  • Oskamp, S., Harrington, M. J., Edwards, T. C, Sherwood, D. L., Okuda, S. M. and Swanson, D. C. (1991). Factors Influencing Household Recycling Behavior, Environment and Behavior, 23(4), 494-519
  • Ponting, C. (2000). A green history of the world: The environment and the collapse of great civilizations, Çev. Ayşe Başçı Sonder (Dünyanın yeşil tarihi: Çevre ve uygarlıkların çöküşü), İstanbul: Sabancı Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Schahn, J. and Holzer, E. (1990). The Role of Knowledge, Gender, and Background Variables , Environment and Behavior, 22(6), 767-786.
  • Schultz, P. W., Gouveia, V. V., Cameron, L. D., Tankha, G., Schmuck, and P., Franek, M. (2005). "Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior." Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 36(4), 457-475.
  • Scott, D. and Willits, F. K. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behavior. A Pennsylvania Survey. Environmental Behaviour, 26, 239-260.
  • Smythe, P.C., & Brook, R.C.(1980). Environmental concerns and actions: A social-psychological investigation. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 12,175-186.
  • Stern, P. C, Dietz, T., Kalof, L., and Guagnang, G. A. (1995). Values, beliefs and pro-environmental action: Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 723-743.
  • Tanner, C. (1999), Constraints on environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19,145-157
  • Tarrant, M.A., Cordell, H.K. (1997). The effects of respondent characteristics on environmental attitude-behavior correspondence. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29, 618-637.
  • Zelezny, L.C. (2000). Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443-457.