Journals / International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) / 2013 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

Long-term educational programs in nature parks: Characteristics, outcomes and challenges

Pages
427–449
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Post priori, teachers as well as the environmental educators acknowledged the need to address the school curriculum and to better involve the teachers

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study on long-term educational programs (LTP) in nature, facilitated by an environmental agency we followed two distinct programs enacted in schools and in nature parks as case studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data were collected through observations of activities in schools and in the outdoors and through interviews with students, teachers and facilitators.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Post priori, teachers as well as the environmental educators acknowledged the need to address the school curriculum and to better involve the teachers
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study on long-term educational programs (LTP) in nature, facilitated by an environmental agency we followed two distinct programs enacted in schools and in nature parks as case studies. Data were collected through observations of activities in schools and in the outdoors and through interviews with students, teachers and facilitators. In one program there were more student-centered and hands on activities and substantial environmental action. In the other program it was the students’ first experience with outdoor and environmental education, and the teachers were more active in the outdoors as “story tellers” and role models. In this program, the students brought up their own concern of littering rather than following the environmental agency’s concern of illegal herb harvesting. In general, in both programs the participant students expressed high satisfaction, and indicated learning about the en- vironment. We found as well limited collaboration between the operating environ- mental organization and the schools and no connection to the school curriculum. Post priori, teachers as well as the environmental educators acknowledged the need to address the school curriculum and to better involve the teachers

🔖

Cite This Article

MORAG, O., TAL, T., ROTEM-KEREN, T. (2022). Long-term educational programs in nature parks: Characteristics, outcomes and challenges. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 427–449. https://ajindex.com/articles/540771

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Al-Haj, M. (1994). The Arab educational system in Israel: Issues and trends. Floersheimer Studies. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University. Ash, D., & Wells, G. (2006). Dialogic inquiry in classrooms and museums. In Z. Bekerman, N. C. Burbles & D. Silberman-Keller (Eds.), Learning in places: The informal education reader (pp. 35-54). New York: Peter Lang. Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2002). Nature-based excursions: School students' perceptions of learning in natural environments. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 11, 218-236.
  2. Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2006). Promoting learning for sustainability: Principals' perceptions of the role of outdoor and environmental education centres. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 15-30.
  3. Bamberger, Y., & Tal, T. (2008). Multiple outcomes of class visits to natural history museums: the students’ view. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 264-274.
  4. Bogner, F. X. (1998). The influence of short-term outdoor ecology education on long-term variables of environmental perspective. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29, 17-29.
  5. Bogner, F. X. (1999). Empirical evaluation of an educational conservation programme introduced in Swiss secondary schools. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1169-1185.
  6. Brody, M. (2005). Learning in nature. Environmental Education Research, 11, 603-621.
  7. Brody, M., Bangert, A., & Dillon, J. (2008). Assessing learning in informal science contexts. Commissioned paper by the National Research Council for Science Learning in Informal Environments committee. Retrieved from http://www.informalscience.org/researches/Brody_Commissioned_Paper.pdf.
  8. DeWitt, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2008). A short review of school field trips: Key findings from the past and implications for the future. Visitor Studies, 11(2), 181-197.
  9. Dillon, J. (2003). On learners and learning in environmental education: missing theories, ignored communities. Environmental Education Research, 9, 215-226.
  10. Dillon, J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M.-Y., Sanders, D., et al. (2006). The value of outdoor learning: evidence from research in the UK and elsewhere. School Science Review, 87, 107-111.
  11. Donaldson, G. W., & Donalsdon, L. E. (1958). Outdoor education: a definition. Journal of Health-Physical Education-Recreation, 17, 63. Eilam, B. (2002). Passing through a western-democratic teacher education: The case of Israeli Arab teachers. The Teachers College Record, 104