Journals / International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education / 2021 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2

Environmental Mental Models of Primary School Students: Are They Related to Gender and Grade Level?

Pages
127–144
Publication Date
2021-07-08
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)

When the drawings were examined, it was found that there are 110 different items related to the concept of environment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to determine the mental models of primary school students about the concept of environment.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research group consisted of 400 students, 219 girls and 181 boys, enrolling to the 3rd and 4th grade in a primary school located in İstanbul.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the drawings were examined, it was found that there are 110 different items related to the concept of environment.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Environment · Mental Models · Environmental Education

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the mental models of primary school students about the concept of environment. The research group consisted of 400 students, 219 girls and 181 boys, enrolling to the 3rd and 4th grade in a primary school located in İstanbul. The students were asked to draw the environment and explain the items they draw. Students’ drawings were converted into quantitative data and scored with Draw an Environment Test-Rubric. When the drawings were examined, it was found that there are 110 different items related to the concept of environment. These items include biotic elements such as humans, different kinds of animals and plants, as well as abiotic elements such as sun, cloud, rain and sea. It was seen that there are also elements of artificial environment such as houses, cars, schools, factories and roads. Mann-Whitney U Test was used in statistical comparisons to determine the difference between the total scores obtained from the drawings according to grade level and gender. While there was a significant difference between the scores of the 3rd and 4th grade students (MD3rd grade=189,46 n=200, MD4th grade =211,54 n=200, U=17792, p=.04), no significant difference was found in the comparisons made according to the gender (MDgirls=205,92 n=219, MDboys=193,94 n=181, U=18632,50, p=.29). The drawings showed that the majority of the students do not see humans as a part of the environment and they have unscientific and missing mental models about the environment.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇALIŞ, D., BALCI, S. (2021). Environmental Mental Models of Primary School Students: Are They Related to Gender and Grade Level?. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2, 127–144. https://ajindex.com/articles/861330

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Ahi, B. (2015). Okul öncesi eğitim programına kaynaştırılan çevre eğitimi programının çocukların ''çevre'' kavramı hakkındaki zihinsel model gelişimine etkisi. Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, Ankara.
  2. Ahi, B., Balcı, S. & Alisinanoğlu, F. (2017) Exploring Turkish preservice teachers' mental models of the environment: Are they related to gender and academic level?, The Journal of Environmental Education, 48(3), 182-195, DOI: 10.1080/00958964.2016.1267102 Akçay, İ. (2006). Farklı ülkelerde okul öncesi öğrencilerine yönelik çevre eğitimi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bursa. Alerby, E. (2000). A way of visualising children's and young people's thoughts about the environment: A study of drawings. Environmental Education Research, 6(3), 205-222.
  3. Barraza, L. (1999). Children's drawings about the environment. Environmental education research, 5(1), 49-66.
  4. Boeve-De Pauw, J. & Van Petegem, P. (2012). Cultural differences in the environmental worldview of children. International Journal of Environmental Education, 2(1), 1-11.
  5. Bozlağan, R. (2010). Sürdürülebilir gelişme düşüncesinin tarihsel arka planı. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, (50), 1011-1028.
  6. Brundtland, G. (1987). Our common future: The world commission on environment and development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Corinin-Jones, L. L. (2005). Using drawings to assess student perceptions of schoolyard habitats: A case study of reform-based research in the United States. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 10(2005), 225-240.
  8. Dove, J. E., Everett, L. A. & Preece, F. W. (1999). Exploring a hydrological concept through children’s drawing. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 485-497.
  9. Driver, R., & Bell, B. F. (1986). Students’ thinking and the learning of science: A constructive view. School Science Review, 67, 443-456.
  10. Ekiz D. (2009).
  11. Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri, Ankara:
  12. Anı. Fleer, M. (2002). Curriculum compartmentalisation?: A futures perspective on environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 8(2), 137-154.
  13. Gilbert, J. K. Pietrocola, M., Zylbersztajn, A. ve Franco, C. (2000). Science and education: Notions of reality, theory and model. J. K. Gilbert ve C. J. Boulter (Eds.), in Developing models in science education, (pp.19-40). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  14. Greca, I., M. & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education,