Eyyup COŞKUN, Muhammet UŞAK, Mehmet ERDOĞAN

Developing Children's Environmental Literacy Through Literature: An Analysis of 100 Basic Literary Works

Developing Children’s Environmental Literacy Through Literature: An Analysis of 100 Basic Literary Works

Problem Statement: Development of environmental literacy, the ultimate goal of environmental education, should not be bound only to the natural sciences. It can also be developed though art and literature when considering the interdisciplinary nature of environmental education. Literary children's books, for example, can be an effective tool to develop students' environmental literacy. Even though MoNE suggested 100 classics for elementary and secondary education students to develop reading habits and to introduce the national and international classic works, number of studies focussing on the implications of these classics on the educational process (policy and practice) and individual development of the students is limited. In this regard, the present study is one of the initial attempts to reveal the hidden and/or explicit effects of these classics on students' environmental literacy. Purpose of Study: The purpose of the study was to analyze the components of environmental literacy embedded in the classic works recommended by MoNE for Turkish elementary schools. Methods: For detailed examination, the researchers randomly selected 10 classics from 63 well-known Turkish classic works for content analysis considering the framework of environmental literacy proposed by Simmons. Content analysis enables the researchers to examine what is or what is not in the selected written or Visual document(s). The results reported the frequency and percentage of environmental literacy components embedded in the selected works. Findings and Results: The content analysis of these works revealed three types of main components (knowledge, affect and behavior) andseveral sub—components. Students’ awareness of the natural environment and geographical pattern (morning-night and seasons-climate) was mostly emphasized in nearly all of the analyzed works. Students’ affect and physical behaviors were relatively less emphasized. Conclusions and Recommendations: In the analyzed classics, environmental pollution, which is one of the main topics and emphases of Environmental Education (EE) was paid very little attention. Considering its interdisciplinary nature, EE should be infused in other subjects (i.e., art and literature) and various classroom activities taking place in humanity classes. In this regard, 100 classics suggested for the elementary and secondary school students can be used as vehicle. This study was only realized with 10 selected classics out of 63 Turkish classics. Foreign classics were not included in the study. It is suggested to other researchers to conduct broader research with more classic works, including both national and international classics.

PDF

___

slan, C. (2006). Türk çocuk yazımnda çocuk-yetişkin çatışmasının yer aldığı kimi yapıtların incelenmesi [An analysis of various pieces on children literature in Turkish on the issue of children—adult conflicts], Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 39 (2), 193-216.
Aslan, C. (2010). An analysis of the Presentation of women in 100 basic literary works in Turkey. Eğitim Araştırmaları—Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 38, 19-36.
Babulski, K., Gannett, C., Myers, K., Peppel, K. Williams, R. (1999). white paper on the relationship between school reform and environmental education in Florida: Correlating Florida's Sunshine State Standards and an Environmental Literacy Framework. Melbourne, FL: Research paper, Science Education Department, Florida Institute of Technology.
Bonnett, M., Williams, ]. (1998). Environmental education and primary children’s attitude towards nature and environment. Cambridge Journal of Education, 28 (2), 159—177.
Coşkun, E. (2005). Qualitative research on evaluations of teachers and students of 4th and 5th class about new Turkish language education curriculum. Educational Sciences: Theory Practice. (2), 421 —476.
Dilidüzgi'ın, S. (2004). Çağdaş çocuk yazım. [Contemporary children literature], lstanbul: Morpa Kültür Yay.
Disinger, ]. F., Roth, C.E. (1992). Environmental literacy. Columbus, Ohio: ERIC SMEAC Information Reference Center. ED 351201.
Dökmen, Ü. (1994). Okuma becerisi, ilgisi ve alışkanlığı uzerine psiko-sosyal bir araştırma. [A Psycho-social investigation on about reading skill, concern and habit]. Ankara: MEB Yay.
Epçaçan, C. Erze, M. (2008). İlköğretim Türkçe dersi öğretim programmın değerlendirilmesi. [The evaluation of elementary Turkish language curriculum]. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, I, (4).
Erdoğan, M. (2009). Fifth grade students’ environmental literacy and the factors ajecting students’ environmentally responsible behaviors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.
Erdoğan, M., Uşak, M. (2009) Curricular and extra-curricular activities to develop the environmental awareness of young students: case from Turkey. Odgojne Znanosti-Educational Sciences, 11(1), 73-85.
Erdoğan, M., Z. Kostova, T. Marcinkowski. (2009). Components of environmental literacy in elementary science education curriculum in Bulgaria and Turkey. Eurasia ]ournal of Mathematics, Science Technology Education, (1), 15—26.
Erdoğan, M., Marcinkowski, T. Ok, (2009). Content analysis of selected features of K—8 environmental education research studies in Turkey, 1997-2007. Environmental Education Research, 15(5), 525-548.
Esgin, A., Karadağ, Ö. (2000). Üniversite öğrencilerinin okuma alışkanlıkları. [Reading habits of university students]. Populer Bilim, 25 (175), 19-23.
Frankel, ]., N. Wallen. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston, MA: McGraw—Hill Higher Education Gömleksiz, M. N. (2007) An evaluation of teachers’ perceptions of the new primary school curriculum in terms of some variables, Eğitim Arastirmalari—Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 27, 69-82.
Güneş, F. (2007). Türkçe öğretimi ve zihinsel yapılandırma. [Turkish language teaching and mental constructivism]. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
Hart, EP. (1981). Identification of key characteristics of environmental education. The journal of Environmental Education, 13 (1), 12—16.
Hazır—Bıkmaz, F. (2006) Yeni ilköğretim programları ve öğretmenler. [New Elementary Curricula and Teachers]. Ankara University, journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 39 (1), 97-116.
Hines, j., Hungerford, H., Tomera, A. (1986/ 87). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: meta-analysis. The journal of Environmental Education, 18 (2), 1-8.
Hungerford, H. R., Peyton, R.B., Wilke, R.]. (1980). Goals for curriculum development in environmental education. The journal of Environmental Education, 11 (3), 42-47.
Hungerford, H.R., Volk, T.L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21 (3), 8-22.
Hsu, S. ]. (1997). An assessment of environmental literacy and analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behavior held by secondary teachers in Hualien country of Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. (Ohio State University) (UMI Number: 9731641)
chay, M., M1s1r11, A., Erdoğan, M., Temiz, N. (2006). Values in classics: content analysis. In Nikos P. Terzis (Ed.) Education and Values in the Balkan Countries. Vol. 7. (pp. 403-410). Greece: Publishing House Kyriakidis Brothers s.a.
lnce, A. Ö. (2008). 100 Temel Eser’in cocuk edebiyatının temel ilkeleri bağlamında incelenmesi [Examining the 100 basic pieces in the context of basic principles of child literature], Unpublished master thesis, Ankara University, Turkey.
Iozzi, L. (ed.) (1981). Research in environmental education, 1971-1980. Columbus, OH: ERIC/SMEAC. (ERIC Document No. 214 762)
Lee, M., Kang, K., Shin, D., Zew, H., Lee, E., N0h, K., Choi, S., Park, ]. (2003). An assessment of Korean students’ environmental literacy and an analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behavior; Final report. (Korea Research Foundation Grant #BS1055). Dankook University, Seoul.
McBeth, W. (Primary investigator PI). (2006). National environmental literacy assessment of middle school students in the US. (A Special Project Award to the North American Association for Environmental Education [Award no NAO6SEC4690009] by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department Commerce). Washington, D.C.: NAAEE.
Metin, M. Demiryürek, G. (2009). Türkçe öğretmenlerinin yenilenen Türkçe öğretim programlarının ölçme-degerlendirme anlayışı hakkındaki düşünceleri [Opinions of Turkish teachers about measurement— assessment approach of renewed Turkish education programmes]. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28, 37- 51.
MoNE (2005). İlköğretim Tu'rkçe dersi öğretim programı ve kilavuzu (1-5. Sınıflar) [Turkish language curriculum and its guide (1th-5th grades)]. Ankara: Author.
MoNE (2006). İlköğretim Türkçe dersi öğretim programı ve kılavuzu (6-8. Sınıflar) [Turkish language curriculum and its guide (6fh—8fh grade)]. Ankara: Author.
Negev, M., Sagy, G., Tal, A., Salzberg A. 8; Garb, Y. (2006). Mapping environmental literacy in Israel. paper presented at 35th Annual NAAEE Conference: Building Environmental Education in Society, St. Paul, MN, The USA.
Odabaş, H., Odabaş, Z. Y. 8; Polat, C. (2008). Üniversite öğrencilerinin okuma alışkanlığı: Ankara Universitesi örneği. [Reading habit of university students: The model of Ankara University]. Bilgi Dünyası, (2), 431-465.
Özdemir, O. (2006). Yazınsal bir tür olarak öykü'nün çevre duyarlığına etkisi ve çevre eğitimi açısından değerlendirilmesi. [The effects of literature on the sensibility towards environment and its value in the environmental education system]. Eurasian journal of Educational Research, 23, 159—167.
Palmer, ].A. (1998). Environmental education in the 21“ century. London; Creative Print and Design.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Rickinson, M. (2001). Special issue: Learners and learning in environmental education: critical review of the evidence. Environmental Education Research, 7(3), 208-320.
Roth, C.E. (1992). Environmental literacy: lts roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s. (ERIC Reproduction service N0. ED348 235).
Schmieder, A.A. (1977). The nature and philosophy of environmental education: Goals and objectives. In UNESCO, Trends in environmental education (pp. 23- 34). Paris, France: UNESCO.
Sever, S. (2005, Kasım). 2004 Öğretim programında Turkce öğretimi anlayışı. [Turkish teaching approach in 2004 curriculum]. Eğitimde Yansımalar lll: Yeni Ilköğretim Programlarını Değerlendirme Sempozyumu’nda sunulan bildiri, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Kayseri.
Simmons, D. (1995). Working paper 2: Developing framework for national environmental education standards. ln Papers on the Development of Environmental Education Standards, ed., 53—58. Troy, OH: NAAEE.
Srbinovski, M., Erdoğan, M. 8: lsrnaili, M. (2010). Environmental literacy in science education curriculum in Turkey and Macedonia. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 2010, 4528-4532.
Volk, T., 8; W. McBeth. (1997). Environmental literacy in the Unites States: What should be... What is...getting from here to there? report funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency and submitted to the Environmental Education and Training Partnership, NAAEE. Washington, DC: US EPA.