INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy o f a docum ent sent to us for microfilming. While the m ost advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this docum ent, the quality o f the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality o f the m aterial subm itted. The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1 .T h e sign or “ targ et” for pages apparently lacking from the docum ent photographed is “ Missing Page(s)” . If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) o r section, they are spliced into the film along w ith adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cu tting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure com plete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black m ark, it is an indication o f either blurred copy because o f m ovem ent during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted m aterials th a t should n o t have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image o f the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted m aterials were deleted, a target n o te will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a m ap, drawing o r chart, etc., is p art o f th e m aterial being photographed, a definite m ethod o f “ sectioning” the material has been followed. It is custom ary to begin filming at the upper left hand com er o f a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections w ith small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until com plete. 4. F or illustrations th at cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into y o u r xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the D issertations C ustom er Services D epartm ent. 5. Some pages in any docum ent may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Microrilrris International 300 N. Z eeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 46106 8303765 Covert, Douglas C. ATTITUDES, ACTIONS AND COMMUNICATION BEHAVIORS O F TEACHERS BEFORE AND AFTER EXPERIENCING AN ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WORKSHOP Michigan State University University Microfilms International Ph.D. 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 1982 PLEASE NOTE: In all c a s e s this material h as been filmed in the best possible way from th e available copy. Problem s enco u n tered with this d o cu m en t have b een identified here with a check m ark V 1. G lossy ph otographs or p a g e s ______ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or prin t______ 3. P hotographs with dark b ac k g ro u n d ______ 4. Illustrations are poor c o p y ______ 5. P a g e s with black marks, not original 6. Print show s through a s th ere is text on both sid e s of p ag e______ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several p a g e s 8. Print ex ceed s margin req u irem en ts______ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine_______ 10. copy__ C om puter printout p ag es with indistinct prin t______ 11. P a g e (s)____________ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. P a g e (s)____________ seem to be missing in numbering only a s text follows. 13. Two pages n u m b e re d _____________ . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled p a g e s ______ 15. . O ther_________________________________________________________________________ University Microfilms International ATTITUDES, ACTIONS AND COMMUNICATION BEHAVIORS OF TEACHERS BEFORE AND AFTER EXPERIENCING AN ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WORKSHOP by Douglas C. Covert A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Fisheries and Wildlife 1982 ABSTRACT ATTITUDES, ACTIONS AND COMMUNICATION BEHAVIORS OF TEACHERS BEFORE AND AFTER EXPERIENCING AN ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WORKSHOP By Douglas C. Covert This study was designed to identify and measure changes in attitudes and behaviors of teachers who had ex­ perienced a well-established workshop for training teachers in environmental education. Data from this before-and-after study offer a basis for examining and evaluating programs directed at teachers and prospective teachers. Entry measurements were made of 123 teachers entering Michigan's "Teachers' Environmental School" in 1978 and of 77 teachers attending in 1979- Second measurements were made by mail survey in November 1979 with response rates of percent respectively. and 53 Tests of internal validity, reliabili­ ty, normality of response distribution, and equality of variance were satisfactory. No changes were found in environmental attitudes using Likert-scale responses to specific statements. Lack of difference was also found in similar groups measured in 1965* Factor analysis identified two principal factors, Douglas C, Covert environmental conservation and socio-political, neither showing significant change. Measurements of personal actions favorable to the environment showed some shifts in details of activity, but no significant differences overall between the before and after responses. About three-fourths of the teachers conducted some form of environmental education in their school program, averaging nine to twelve minutes per day. While a lower percentage involved students in out-of-school environmental learning activities in the second measurement, they did so more often, both changes significant at .05* In-school quantities did not change significantly. Mass media use averaged 3-9 hours per day with time divided almost equally between television, radio and the periodical-print media. Preference was shown for those pr e ­ sentations treating topics in depth. No sources were report­ ed as preferred for resolving conflicts in environmentally related information received. Colleagues were perceived as being no more reliable or credible than media news sources. Overall results showed no significant differences between before and after responses except for out-of-school environmental learning activities. Extension of results should not be made to programs of the Teachers' Environmental School, or elsewhere, which depart substantially from those of the years included in this study. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to David I. Johnson, committee chairman and rigorous examiner, and to the other members of my committee, R. V. Farace, R. V. Hudson and R. W. George for their guidance in the development and conduct of this study. I am also gratefully indebted to Professor E. P. Trotter of California State University, Fullerton for assistance in the application of analytical methodology and to R. G. Heppard for continued encouragement in this undertaking. Special thanks are directed to all of the faculty members of the Teachers' Environmental School, not only for their assistance in this study, but for their continuing dedication to the purposes of environmental education. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF LIST OF T A B L E S ............................. v F I G U R E S ............................. vii Chapter I .INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW ................. 1 Introduction ................................... Literature Review ............................ 1 4 II.M E T H O D O L O G Y ............................................. 16 Population Selection .......................... 18 Experimental Design .......................... 19 Assumptions and Limitations ................. 20 The Measuring Instrument ...................... 21 Environmental Attitude Measure ........... 22 Perceived Content Measure ................. 23 Personal Environmental Actions ........... 23 Professional Environmental Education Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Use and Perceptions of Mass M e d i a ........... 25 Data Collection and P r o c e s s i n g .................. 26 III.RESULTS OF THE I N V E S T I G A T I O N .......................... 29 Environmental Attitudes ...................... 29 Attitude Measure .......................... 30 Perceived Content .......................... 33 Crisis V i e w ................................... 35 Personal Environmental Actions ............... 36 Environmental Education Practices ........... 39 Time per W e e k ................................. 40 Out-of-School Activity ................... 42 TES Attendance Influence ................. 44 Use and Perceptions of Mass M e d i a ............. 45 Media Exposure Quantities ................. 46 iii Information Sources Evaluation . . . . . . . . k9 Objectivity R a n k ............................ ^9 Credibility R a t i n g ............. 50 ........................ 52 Reliability Rating Conflict Resolution ........................ 5^ Correlations of Media Use and Media P e r c e p t i o n s ............................... 55 IV. D I S C U S S I O N .......................................... 58 Environmental Attitudes ...................... 59 Attitude Measure .......................... 59 Crisis V i e w ................................... 6l Content Perception ........................ 6l Attitude Relationships .................... 6l Personal Environmental Actions ............... 62 Environmental Education Practices ........... 63 Relationships with Perceived Content ... 6k Relationships with Attitudes ............. 65 Use and Perceptions of Mass M e d i a ............. 65 Relationships with Attitudes ............. 66 Tests of H y p o t h e s e s .............................6? V. SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S I O N S ............................. 70 Summary of R e s u l t s ............................... 71 A t t i t u d e s ..................................... 71 Personal Actions .......................... 72 Professional Perceptions.................... 72 Information Sources ........................ 73 Recommendations .............................. 73 Implications for Future Research ............. ?k APPENDICES A. THE TEACHERS’ ENVIRONMENTAL SCHOOL .............. 76 Data Collection P r o c e d u r e s ...................... 78 Demographic Description of the Populations Studied ................... 80 . . 83 ...................... 90 .................... 97 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDE PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE C. THE GEORGE ATTITUDE MEASURE D. TESTING THE ATTITUDE MEASURE E. PERCEIVED CONTENT L I S T ............................ 103 F. C O D E B O O K ........................................... 106 R E F E R E N C E S ................................................. 118 iv LIST OP TABLES 1. GROUP IDENTIFICATION AND DATA COLLECTION POINTS 2. ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDE PROFILE: Group Scores 3. ATTITUDE MEASURE SCORES BY GROUPS ................ 30 4. ATTITUDE MEASURE COMPARISONS, TOTAL MEASURE AND FACTORS, t-TESTS ................................. 32 5. PERCEIVED CONTENT R A N K ............................. 33 6. PERCEIVED CONTENT, NUMBER OF TOPICS CHOSEN BY G R O U P ......................................... 34 ?. PERCEIVED CONTENT COMPARISON ...................... 34 8. "CRISIS" VIEW C O M P A R I S O N ........................... 35 9. PERSONAL ACTIONS PROFILE ........................... 36 10. PROJECT PARTICIPATION PROFILE .................... 38 11. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PRACTICES PROFILE, SUMMARY BY G R O U P ................................. 40 AVERAGE MINUTES PER WEEK OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ....................................... 4l 13. WORKSHOPS AND CLASSROOM T I M E ...................... 42 14. OUT-OF-SCHOOL ACTIVITY BY GROUP .................. 43 15. ATTENDANCE INFLUENCE BY G R O U P .................... 44 16. MEDIA U S E ........... . ............................ 46 17. MEDIA USE EXCLUDING E X T R E M E S ...................... 47 12. v . ... 28 29 18. MEDIA USE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE, All Groups . . . . 19. MEDIA USE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE, Paired 20. MEDIA PERCEPTION, 21. 22. if8 Groups . . 48 OBJECTIVITY RANK AND RATING . . 50 MEDIA PERCEPTION, CREDIBILITY RANK AND RATING . . 51 MEDIA PERCEPTION, RELIABILITY RANK AND RATING . . 53 23. CONFLICT RESOLUTION SOURCES ..................... 54 24. OBJECTIVITY RANK AND MEDIA U S E ................... 56 25. CREDIBILITY RATING AND MEDIA U S E ................. 57 APPENDICES LIST OF TABLES Al. DEMOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF THE POPULATIONS . . . . 82 Dl. HOMOGENEITY OF VARIANCE T E S T ............... 97 D2. RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS, ALL ITEMS D3< RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS, ALL ENTRY RESPONDENTS D4. FACTORS AND TOTAL MEASURE, PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATIONS ................................... ............. 99 . 100 100 D5. MEANS COMPARISON, TOTAL AND FACTORS, ADJUSTED TO PRINCIPAL FACTOR 2 ............................. 101 D6. ATTITUDE MEASURE STATEMENTS, Mean Scores Uy G r o u p s .......................................... 102 El. HOMOGENEITY OF VARIANCE T E S T ........................ 105 E2. RELIABILITY COEFFICIENT ALPHA, ALL ENTRY R E S P O N D E N T S ........................................ 105 vi LIST OF FIGURES Information Source Profile . . . CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction Concern for the earth's biological and physical resources has prompted many educational programs focusing on the human environment. Directed at both young people and adults, success has been claimed for most of these programs based on enrollment demands and the enthusiasm of participants. But an educational process of such fundamental character as environmental education should be evaluated for its effects, not its popularity. Intuitive evaluations need to be subjected to analytical scrutiny; rational examination may support or reject some or all of the programs, and some or all of the processes. A well-established program is Michigan's "Teachers' Environmental School," intensive, week-long, residential workshops conducted during the summer by Michigan universi­ ties. Here teachers expect to learn concepts and details useful in their professional practice of environmental education. Through several decades, it has earned a reputation for excellence and serves well as a model for 2 evaluation of effects. This investigation was developed to identify changes in attitudes and behaviors of teachers who had experienced the Teachers' Environmental School. It was expected that some of the findings in this before-and-after study would link changes in attitudes or behaviors to the environmental education experience. Little has been reported to date about the effects on attitudes, perceptions of environmental education content, or professional behaviors of teachers who have undergone extended environmental education training. Much of the work in this area has used students, particularly college students as the subjects of investigation. Teachers expressing interest in "environmental!zing" their teaching or volunteer­ ing for training in environmental education have not been thoroughly described nor change-effects widely reported. There are administrative and legal mandates support­ ing environmental education. In the state of Michigan, the Department of Education has saidt . . . education has an important role to play now and in the coming years in helping people rationally solve some of the persistent problems associated with our natural and man-made environment. Education is the key to chang­ ing human attitudes, values and feelings, as well as behaviors — and doing so through intrinsic means. (Michigan Department of Education, 1973, P-l) The Senate of the State of Michigan promoted environ­ mental education in Concurrent Resolution No. 69 of June 1971. The Environmental Education Act, Public Law 91-516, of October 1970 further endorsed environmental education, 3 emphasizing the broad scope: . . . the educational process dealing with m a n ’s rela­ tionship with his natural and man-made surroundings, and including the relation of population, pollution, resource allocation and depletion, conservation, transportation, technology and urban and rural planning to the total human environment . . . (U.S. Congress, 91st, October 1970: Environmental Education Act). Acquisition of knowledge about the environment is necessary but not sufficient. Indeed, education is likely to serve in resisting persuasion rather than promoting change from traditional patterns of belief and environmental conser­ vation is a departure from the established frontier ethic of development. Sources and potential sources of information about environmental issues need to be considered in conjunction with the educative programs. The ubiquitous mass media are at least as important in affecting environmental attitudes as are formally conducted educational programs, probably most effective in distributing information about the acceptable norms of society. While the apparent effects of mass media on environ­ mental attitudes of general audiences have been published, there is little to indicate relationships between mass media and the professional behaviors of teachers in the environ­ mental arena. Assessment of the use patterns, of a contin­ uing nature, could indicate the potential for influence of various media on the continuing development of teacher beliefs and attitudes. The school classroom is a unique context. It serves ija dual communication function of mass medium and interper­ sonal medium, with the teacher as a regulator, gatekeeper and model for the pupils. It is appropriate that teachers should be a focus of environmental education efforts and that programs for the development of environmentally effective teachers should be examined. The information developed in this study offers a basis for reexamining environmental education programs directed specifically at teachers and prospective teachers. Literature Review Following the first appearance of the term environ­ mental education in 1968 (Swan, 1975)< many attempts were made to define the scope of the subject. The Environmental Education Act, Public Lav/ 91“5l6, of October 1970, offered as a definition: . . . the educational process dealing with man's relationship with his natural and man-made surroundings, and including the relation of population, pollution, resource allocation and depletion, conservation, trans­ portation, technology and urban and rural planning to the total human environment . . . (U.S. Congress, 91st, October 1970: Environmental Education Act). This led educators to develop a variety of goals descriptions for the topic which Johnson (1977) found lacking in cohesiveness and broad acceptability and in need of clarification. A thorough set of goals statements for curriculum development were subsequently formulated by Hungerford, et a l . (1980). Early emphasis on a base in biophysical ecology 5 rapidly expanded to encompass "ecological psychology" (Barker, 1968), "social ecology" mental psychology" (Binder, et a l ., 1975) and "environ­ (Baum, et al., 1978). While this broadening and goal-development was taking place, practitioners of environmental education in the class­ room continued to structure their teaching around biology and biophysical concepts (Calcote, 1976; Childress, 1978; Carrington and Davis, 1980 ) with some extension into illdefined awareness, recognition, appreciation, motivation, concern, and positive attitude. Much of the emphasis in the classroom and out-of­ school excursions on biophysical ecology rather than the broader concepts of environment were explained as lack of teacher understanding of the nature of environmental educa­ tion (Hepburn and Keach, and is not value-laden; 197*0 and that "Ecology is a science environmental decision-making most certainly is!" (Hungerford, 1975)* Further, classroom and comm’ .nity approaches to the resolution of environmental issues seemed to be more successful when directed toward specific situations which did not conflict with community value systems (Tanner, 197*+; Grunig and Stamm, 1979)* Selected nature-study topics within a community were often found to be relatively "safe" whereas social topics were frequently considered treacherous (Murch, 1971; Schuman, 1972; Tichenor, et al., 1980). With research focused on classroom practices and knowledge-gain, there was little in the literature to indicate 6 the perceptions which teachers held as to the curricular scope of environmental education. Further, with many methods in use to expand teachers' views of environmental education, little effort was made to describe the success (or failure) of these methods. A useful statement summarizing the purposes of environmental education is that of Pettus (1976, p. ^-8): The goal of environmental education is to bring about informed environmental policies for society which will be compatible with the maintenance of a suitable planetary environment. The literature consensus is that a "favorable attitude" is requisite to meeting this goal and that environmental educa­ tion can and should be directed toward development of that favorable attitude concerning the planetary environment. Some writers, such as McNelly (1973)» seemed to con­ tend that favorable attitudes would arise directly from a sound information base; one of the variables which Roth (1979) found most significant as influencing environmentally favor­ able behavior was knowledge. that of Ritz McNelly's view seems to parallel (1977) that getting teachers involved and active on a personal level would naturally lead them to become environmental educators. Research does not always support the view that information leads to favorable attitudes as witnessed by Stamm and Ross (1966), Swan (1970), Tichenor and Bowers (1971), Stamm and Bowes (1972) and others. Burrus-Bammel found knowledge and attitudes uncorrelated in 1978 but 7 correlated in 1979 (Burrus-Bamme1, et a l ., 1980). This last may have "been more closely related to relevance of the information (knowledge) than to attitude expressions (cf. Leftridge and James, 1980 ). Favorable attitudes may be less stable showing slight­ ly reduced numerical ratings with increasing knowledge (Kupchella and Levy, 1975)» a view supported by Pettus (1976) who found some evidence of an inverse relationship. Pettus also found that "Private environmental attitudes are indepen­ dent of public environmental attitudes . . . ." The Borden and Schettino study (1979) found "feelings" as important as knowledge, concluding that cognitive and affective aspects were substitutable in causing behavior change. Many efforts at environmental attitude measurement have been made to determine if environmental education programs elicit change. intensive programs Most of these have demonstrated that (treatments) do indeed result in more positive attitudes, according to the measuring instruments, when applied to students. However, when applied to teachers, Wileman (1976) found no basis for concluding that treatment affected environmental attitudes. Hounshell and Liggett (1976) reported changes in student attitudes but did not report on the teachers. Perhaps a different treatment program is needed for teachers. Another consideration was expressed by Kelman (1958) that attitude changes by teachers might be less durable than those of students in the absence of surveillance, meaningful 8 relationship or relevance. Considering that intervention or guidance in inter­ pretation has a strong influence on the retention of information by children (Corder-Bolz and O'Bryant, 1978) and that . . . teachers are important representatives of the attitudes toward which children are socialized. They also transmit ideals of citizen behavior and teach some of the skills necessary to fill these requirements . . , (Hess and T o m e y , 1968, p. 15)* it is valuable to know the attitudes teachers carry into the classroom. Foerstel (1976) has been one of the few researchers to examine the attitudes of a general population and teachers at the same time, although that was not his primary intent. His work dealt with specific problems rather than more generalized attitudes. While he found problem-ranking consistency within each group, he found little congruence between groups. A conclusion which may be drawn from his study is that perception of environmental problem severity varies to such a degree that extrapolation from a group of students, parents, teachers, or environmentalists to any of the other groups is not valid, even within the same community. There may be some congruence between groups if the attitudes measured are more general than specific. That students and their parents will not necessarily agree on specific issues has also been suggested by Connell (1972). A range of acceptable beliefs is quite likely gained from parents but patterns of mass belief are more likely 9 sociological in origin than familial. Connell's thesis was supported by Friedman, et al. These suggestions and (1972). especially Foerstel's findings were strongly supported by McTeer (1978). The differences in attitudes and acceptable solutions to problems between students, teachers, and the community at large may reflect the relevance of Leftridge and James (1980), the "situational antecedents" of Grunig and Stamm (1979) and the required "degree of commitment of personal resources" of Ramsey and Rickson (1976). These differences may require adjustment in teacher-training prog­ rams so that the individual teacher may learn to adapt to student and community needs for more effectiveness in environmental education programs. (Cf. Tanner, 197*0 In approaching the attitude-behavior relationship, a study by Weinstein (1972) indicated a need to combine attitude toward an issue and attitude toward an action rather than either alone to suggest behavior predictability. He proposed that a negative action attitude would probably prevail over a positive issue attitude. Further, he found that a positive action attitude and a positive issue attitude did not make for a reliable predictor of behavior either. This was supported by Schuman (1972) in his "situational variability" which usually resulted in compromise where the positions taken tended to reveal relative strength of values. This difference in attitudes between the issues and the actions was further emphasized by Peyton (1977) when he found that less than half of the pre-service teachers 10 (elementary education students) in his study engaged in either individual or group actions favorable to the environment and that the participants in general considered action involve­ ment on their part peripheral to environmental education. Harvey (1976) avoided specifying actions as expected outcomes of environmental education referrring to competence and dedication, the "intentions" of environmental literates, as the outcome goals. Ray (1973) suggested that learning followed attitude change which followed behavior change, the attitude change bolstering the choice of behaviors. All of these studies suggest reasons why measured attitudes and demonstrated behaviors do not necessarily show statistical relationships. But personal actions and professional (teaching) behaviors may differ. Ritz (1977) implied that personal actions and classroom practices fell within the same affective-behavioral construct, although Cummings (1976) saw the classroom behavior as a distinct pattern, separate from external behaviors. Much of the reluctance of individual teachers to incorporate environmental education programs into their continuing classroom conduct has been viewed as a perceived low level of their own competency (Peyton, 1977} Ritz, 1977i Bozardt, 1976} Cummings, 1976} Hungerford, 1975} Howie, 197^)The great number of college majors and minors in environmental science, environmental education, pre-service environmental courses for teachers-to-be, and in-service 11 courses for practicing teachers may alleviate this perceived competency restraint (Trent, 1976). Actual application in the classroom, however, may be dependent on community and administrative policies. McCaw (1979/80) found teachers were interested in environmental education in-service train­ ing but only after thorough development of basic curriculum subjects . Cummings (1976) has adopted a particularly interest­ ing approach in viewing environmental education as a market. He points to the student as the ultimate consumer of the content with the teacher as the primary consumer of the materials of instruction. His study found 70 percent of the teachers surveyed were adopters of environmental education curricular materials. This latter figure compares with the 57 percent cited by Wint (1977)* The Cummings study is also of special interest in evaluating curriculum package adoption potential. He found that environmental education program packages were most likely to be adopted if they required little teacherpreparation time, consumed little class time and offered considerable direction to the students. the appeared to be "a desire to As Cummings put it, 'spice-up' the existing curriculum rather than to make substantive changes." Observations by Bozardt (1976) also emphasized that attitude. Acceptability of attractive packages has been widely noted, typified by Carrington and Davis (1980 ). And there apparently needs to be little concern that there would be a 12 decrease in information-gain with popularization of the content (Hunsaker, 1979)- Indeed, Cronholm and Sandell (1981) suggest a very wide acceptance of popular styles of presenta­ tion of scientific information, without loss of potential for growth in knowledge but decided gain in potential. McNelly related information, attitudes and behaviors in a simple and basic statement: Information provides the raw material on the basis of which people form their beliefs, which in turn provide the basis for their attitudes and behaviors. (1973. P- 31) He proceeded to construct a conceptual case for information building a set of beliefs which, when related, formed an attitude structure which then predisposed the holder to respond in a favorable or unfavorable manner. McNelly did not assume a direct or causal relationship in this system which would necessarily result in the predisposed behaviors, but credited the situational variables with the final control. Nonetheless, he strongly promoted the proposition that information is the basis for attitudes and attitude changes with the information receiver playing an active role in the processing and the structuring. On the other hand, the 1 966 Stamm and Ross study in Wisconsin found that "environmental knowledge bore no relation to community members' attitudes," a position confirmed by Tichenor, et al. (1980 ). The role played by environmental educators in the overall communication system disseminating information about environmental matters is distinctive. The term "quasi-mass communication" cited by Davison, et a l . (1978, p . 122), seems 13 particularly suited. The fairly standard messages delivered to classrooms across the country make teaching resemble a mass communication system. At the same time, the messages are presented in face-to-face encounters with some opportun­ ity for audience (and parental) feedback and so teaching resembles interpersonal communication. The peculiar nature of this blend seems to warrant the continued use of the quasi-mass communication terminology. The environmental educator may be an effective regulator and gatekeeper in the quasi-mass communication system involving students. As educator, the teacher serves also as a redistribution system which McNelly (1973) consider­ ed of vital importance to the total communication process. There is also a special opportunity for co-orientation of teachers and pupils with the potential for agreement, accuracy and congruency relationships (Chaffee and McLeod, 1968 ) . Witt (1973) recognized the complex nature of environ­ mental communication and expanded on traditional models of communication. He was especially concerned that even the Westley-MacLean model did not accommodate, in science and environmental communication systems, to receivers being sources at the same time. The Witt model readily accommodat­ ed the agenda-setting influence of environmental educators, the importance of which was noted by Schoenfeld (1977)• which other models did not. The complexity of environmental mass communication 14 and its possible effects, and the questionable potential for changing environmental attitudes, was underlined by Stamm (1972). He suggested that environmental education efforts would have little or no cognitive change effects involving high salience objects, a view supported by Mazur (1981). If the environmental attitudes of teachers and, through them, their students can be changed, reinforced, modified, "agendized” or otherwise manipulated by mass communication, it would seem appropriate to identify the strength of media impingement. Sellers and Jones (1973. P*53) cite an instance where mass media were avoided in an environ­ mental influence campaign and efforts to sway attitudes were directed at the interpersonal and quasi-mass communication systems. Stamm (1972) described selected environmental campaigns and the communication problems which became evident during the efforts. Leahy and Mazur (1980) have explored many of the reasons for the antagonisms. But shifting emphases in mass communication research suggest the influence may be less that of a potential change agent than that of a reinforcer, especially of a conservative bias (cf. Mazur and Conant, 1978). The uses and gratifica­ tions interpretation of mass media evaluations places emphasis on the functions the media serve rather than the effects of mass communication systems (Kippax and Murray, 1980). Palmgreen, et al. (1981 ), and others, have found that decisions in use of mass media, especially those aspects (and programs) offering information, are strongly related to 15 audience perceptions of gratifications received from media use. Those who have observed teachers in environmental education workshops, of short or long duration, may be disturbed by parallels with the Kippax and Murray study of need gratification and perceived utility. They found the most important needs when audiences turned to mass media were, in descending order: self-identity and social contact, self-gratification, then information, followed by entertain­ ment and diversion. There are few studies in the literature focusing on the effects on teachers of training programs in the conduct of environmental education. Acceptance of curricular goals or incorporation of environmental education goals into existing curricula have not been widely noted. Even when confined to the realm of biophysical ecology, there has been a lack of reported measurement of environmental education practices in the school program. This study will add to knowledge of teacher attitudes and behaviors and some effects of influences on those attitudes and behaviors. CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY One of the assignments given to teachers in Michigan schools by the Michigan Department of Education is that of systematically educating the citizenry about the environment. This study examined self-selected samples of teachers with an expressed interest in environmental education as to their attitudes toward environmental issues, their personal actions in areas of environmental conservation, their tendencies to conduct environmental education in their classrooms, and their sources of information which influence their own behaviors and from which they influence the attitudes and behaviors of their pu p ils. With emphasis given to changes which may have occurred over time, five dimensions were chosen for study: 1. Attitudes toward environmental affairs — the intensity of positive attitudes toward the environment 2. Perception of the scope of environmental education — inclusion of subject areas within the overall framework of environmental education 3. Personal environmental actions — the extent of personal involvement in environmental improvement efforts 4. Professional activities in environmental education — 16 17 the extent of involvement in environmental education with their pupils 5. Use of mass media information sources on a continuing basis -- an assessment of media use and perceptions which contribute to the development of beliefs and attitudes. This investigation expanded on an earlier study in which an entry profile of enrollees was constructed (Covert, 1980) and responded to a question voiced by a faculty member of the Teachers’ Environmental School, Dr. Jane Renaud: Is this program worthwhile or are we spinning our wheels, having no impact on the classroom, deceiving ourselves as to the value of what we are doing here? Six hypotheses were central to this study. Hypothesis 1 . There will be no difference between environ­ mental conservation attitudes before and after an intensive environmental education experience. Hypothesis 2 . There will be no difference between perceptions of the scope of environmental education before and after an intensive environmental education experience. Hypothesis 3 . There will be no difference between personal actions favorable to the environment before and after an intensive environmental education experience. Hypothesis 4 . There will be no difference between profession­ al environmental education practices before and after an intensive environmental education experience. Hypothesis 5 . There will be no difference between information source-preferences for resolution of conflicting information about environmental matters before and after an intensive 18 environmental education experience. Hypothesis 6 . There will he no difference between mass media information-quality perceptions before and after an intensive environmental education experience. Population Selection The populations selected for this study consisted of teachers attending any one of four one-week "Teachers' Environmental School" (TES) workshops conducted during the summer of 1978 and of two conducted during the summer of 1979- Each of the 1978 workshops was conducted by a differ­ ent Michigan university: Michigan State University, Eastern Michigan University, Wayne State University, and Central Michigan University. In 1979 Eastern Michigan joined with Michigan State and Central Michigan joined with Wayne State in conducting TES workshops. A description of the Teachers' Environmental School and its staffing is in Appendix A. Because the TES was designed to assist teachers in beginning or improving environmental education In their classrooms, it was assumed that the populations would be demonstrating through attendance a special interest in their biophysical surroundings or environmental education or both. The workshop experience required commitment to a five day, participatory, residential program during the summer, between academic y e a r s . Enrollment in this program would then distinguish the study groups from an average of teachers. Results should 19 not, therefore, be extended to all teachers. In addition, although it is tempting to apply the findings to teachers who, in other years, may choose to attend the TES, the groups measured were not randomly selected and may thus be subject to confounding influences, limiting the general!zability of the study. Interaction of the first measurement on the effect of the TES experience may have occurred but it was expected to be sufficiently subordinate to self-selection bias to be ignored as a further threat to experimental validity. Experimental Design Two groups of teachers attending the TES were selected for pretesting on entry to the School and posttesting several months later. One hundred eighty persons attending four sessions of the TES during the summer of 1978 were asked to complete an environmental attitude and action profile questionnaire as an opening activity of the week-long workshop program. Of these, 123 were teachers making up the first study group. In the summer of 1979. one hundred twenty persons were asked to complete the same questionnaire. Seventy seven of these were teachers who then made up the second group. On ^ November 1979. the same questionnaire was mailed to all members of both groups. The questionnaire, containing 68 numbered items, was accompanied by a cover letter again stating the purpose and source of the request. Both the 20 questionnaire and the cover letter are in Appendix B. This schedule was expected to minimize the effects of intervening events on the second measurement and reduce or eliminate selection-maturation interaction. Loss of some respondents between first and second measurements was consid­ ered a possible source of bias with potential for exacerba­ tion in analysis because of respondent anonymity. With self-selection bias at work in both the initial and second testing, it was anticipated that before and after group-differences would be intensified, perhaps indicating differences where there were none. Conservative statistical tests and substantive judgments based on the two different time spans (four and sixteen month intervals) were expected to alleviate interpretation of this variable. Assumptions and Limitations In the design of this study, it was assumed that the populations measured would be representative of teachers who would choose to participate in other years. It was also assumed that the self-reports would be reasonably accurate portrayals of the respondents' true self-perceptions. Further, it was assumed that subject bias in response would be normally distributed through all groups measured. A limitation which must be emphasized is that the data collected and its interpretation represent only the populations and TES programs specifiedj no extension should be made to populations selected on other bases or TES programs 21 which depart substantially from those included in this study. In the measurement of attitudes, no distinctions were made between beliefs, attitudes or values Niman, 1975)■ (cf. Gross and The measurement and effects of knowledge changes on other dimensions were considered beyond the scope of this study. No attempts were made to explore the behavior- to-attitude sequence of Ray (1973)• While the "treatments" would be expected to vary from week to week and from year to year, the consistency of goals within the TES program and faculty members, and the year-group analysis method were considered sufficient for the purposes of this study. The participants were urged in the introduction to the questionnaire to "answer not what you think you should» but your actual thoughts and practices." Nonetheless, bias toward the expected views of the researcher and the Teachers' Environmental School undoubtedly appeared. It is also probable that the admonition and efforts to report accurately and without bias faded to some extent during the time it took to complete the questionnaire. The Measuring Instrument The measuring instrument used in this study was developed as a questionnaire to seek data along the five dimensions stated earlier. Consisting of 68 numbered items (see Appendix B), it elicited self-reporting based on facts recalled and self-perceptions. 22 Environmental Attitude Measure The attitude measuring instrument applied in this study was taken from George (1966 ) who modified Whiteman's (1965 ) questionnaire which had "been built on the work of Laug (i960 ). A description and discussion of the George study is in Appendix C. George tested his instrument on trial-groups and compared the results with those of Whiteman and Laug, con­ cluding that the attitude questionnaire was acceptable as an attitude measuring device and was reliable. This prior development including trial-group testing suggested that the 32-item measure had face validity and surveyed the attitude domain sufficiently. None of the investigators reported their testing for internal consistency nor were statistical procedures employed to estimate the instrument's reliability. Responses of the entry groups in this study were examined, as separate groups and as a whole, for validity, reliability, normality, and homoscedasticity. A more thorough discussion of this testing in in Appendix D. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov one-sample test for goodness of fit showed no basis for rejecting the assumption of normality. Hotelling’s T 2 test, analysis of variance F tests and comparisons of the two indicated homogeneity of variance was a reasonable assumption. 23 Perceived Content Measure There has often been difficulty with attempts at defining environmental education, among teacher groups as well as others. Many highly regarded advocates have empha­ sized biology while others have added the physical aspects of the earth to their focus. Development of the environmental concept in other disciplines such as sociology and economics has led still others to embrace a holistic view, that environ­ mental education has a reality independent of and greater than the sum of its p a r t s . The perception held by the teachers in this study as to the scope of environmental education was measured by the list of school-subject areas in item 1 of the questionnaire. A discussion of this list and its derivation is in Appendix E. Response to such a list does not, of course, measure holistic perception. It does measure a perceived scope of environmental education in the school setting. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test failed to reject the assumption of normality, homoscedasticity was supported, and reliability was high (see Appendix E ) . Construct validity depends on application and on correlation between perceived content and classroom practices over repeated studies. Personal Environmental Actions Four categories of personal involvement were chosen to reflect public and private actions in verbal and physical forms which would favor environmental conservation. The 2b questions included in this study, continued from the prior work, were intended to explore the domain, not sample it thoroughly, to see if personal actions were in consonance with attitudes and to search out changes which might have occurred. The questions ranged from public airing of environ­ mental views through progressively more private expressions, and from active participation in public environmental con­ servation projects to private activities exemplified by recycling. These topics appeared to place no special finan­ cial demands on the respondents as would many other topics such as some of the energy conservation projects. Professional Environmental Education Practices Several measures were selected to reflect the extent of activity in environmental education. Self-reporting of time spent on environmental education in the classroom was a primary measure to be correlated with attitude and perceivedcontent scores. Situational influences and perceived expectations were expected to affect these three dimensions similarly. Several approaches to the anticipated bias of this self-report were considered but the straightforward approach was thought to be sufficiently useful. Additional questions would offer interpretive support. Reports on specific activities were requested so as to include the common "outdoor education" programs. Inclusion of all activities was intended such as scouting and 4-H and 25 any special functions such as community campaigns. The choice here was to insure inclusion of all activities which the respondent might consider environmentally-related and which fell within the realm of the professional teacher-pupil relationship. Use and Perceptions of Mass Media The sources which teachers use to obtain the bulk of environmental information and from which they influence their students have not been well-defined. Work in behavioral ecology suggests that manipulation, persuasion and advertise­ ment are more important than information transmission, often specifying television as the principal influence with other commercial mass media following closely behind (Wilbur, 1979)* Pour mass media were selected as the base in this study for their ready availability, wide use and currency. Books on environmental matters were considered by the researcher as rapidly outdated, probably used intermittently, and generally supplanted in their effects by the more frequent impingement of the other media. Exposure quantities were desired but perceptions of quality as well. Changes between entry and later perceptions of objectivity and credibility rankings of the media might reflect changes in viewer/listener/reader skepticism or acceptance with increased knowledge of specific subject areas acquired during the intervening period. With the strong differences in physical form, sensory 26 Impact, commitment to consumption, and scale of treatment "between the four mass media in this study, it was desirable to use a common denominator for comparative purposes in evaluating objectivity. The premise was adopted that these populations could identify and evaluate the reporters of information and that the reporters could then serve as the comparison base across the media. Respondents were also asked to indicate their general perceptions of media credibility, again employing a question form inviting comparison. A variety of information sources was selected for a broad evaluation. An essential purpose was to test the relative position of colleagues as a representative of inter­ personal information sources and formal classes as represent­ ative of quasi-mass media. Workshops and seminars would have been preferable in the latter instance but the inherent bias of the entry environment would have been prohibitively high. Formal classes as a category was in itself a contaminant. The terms up-to-date, accurate and thorough were used in the questionnaire but abbreviated for reporting convenience into the term reliability. Data Collection and Processing Data collection was conducted in three stages during 1978 and 1979* Entry level responses for each year were gathered as a part of the first, orientation meetings of the TES sessions, before instructional programs of the five-day 27 workshop began. The same questionnaire was mailed to the same participants in November of 1979* Response from the summer 1978 group was k6 percent and from the summer 1979 group 53 percent. A follow-up mailing was not conducted as middle or late winter would offer a response environment markedly different from that of the first wave of returns. Responses of each person were coded by the researcher and analyzed by statistical procedures, computer performed. Data analysis made use of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) release 8.0 available to the California State University, Fullerton, using a Control Data Corporation CYBER computer system. The codebook for data entry is included in Appendix F . A critical value at .05 significance was chosen for comparisons and tests of relationships as the most reasonable balance between Type I and Type II errors. In the data arrays and references to the four groups in this study, abbreviated identifications are used. The group measured on entry to the TES in 1978 is labelled 1978E. Likewise, the 1979 entry group is 1979E. The groups measured in November 1979 by mail are identified by their year at the TES and G, representing graduate of the school. Comparisons are made then between the two entry groups, 1978E and 1979E, and between entry and graduate characteristics of the same group, 1978E to 1978G and 1979E to 1979G■ the group identification flow. Table 1 illustrates 26 TABLE 1 GROUP IDENTIFICATION AND DATA COLLECTION POINTS 1978 Year Group 1978 1979 First Response 1979 First Response Second Response 1978E.............. 1979E-* *■-1979G CHAPTER III RESULTS OP THE INVESTIGATION The questions posed in the formulation of this study may be broadly stated as: What do actively interested teachers think about environmental issues?; What do they do personally?; What do they do with their students?; and, What are their most frequently encountered and respected sources of information? Environmental Attitudes The three components of attitude measured in this study are presented in Table 2. TABLE 2 ENVIRONMENT,ATTITUDE PROFILE Croup Scores 19788 N-123 1979E N= 77 19780 N» 53 19790 N= U2 0 -1 2 8 mean sd ,95 C.I. range 102.30 13*82 99.83-10U.77 7U-12U 1 0 5 .3 2 10.71 102.89-107.76 5B-127 10U.3 U 1 0 .0 8 1 0 1 .56 -1 0 7 .1 2 85-125 107.7U 10.53 10U.U5-lll.02 8 2 -1 2 8 Environmental Education Content Perception 0-28 mean sd .95 C.I. range (# at 28) 16.17 6 .7 2 1U.97-17.37 U- 2 8 19-38 7 .2 0 17.7U-21.01 5-28 16.55 7. IB lU.5 6 -1 8 .5 3 U-2 8 1 8 .6 7 7.29 16,39-20.9U U-28 (26) Crisis View (0*not l=slight 2=moderate 3=seriou8) mean Bd .95 C.I. range (# at 3) 2.75 Attitude Me&Bure (25) (13) 2.8U .UO 2.75-2.9U 1-3 (86) M 2 .6 7 -2 .8 U 1 -3 (77) mail response rates 29 (13) 2.77 •U7 2.6U-2.91 1-3 (79) U6# 2.90 •31 2.79-3.00 2-3 (90) 53# 30 Attitude Measure The attitude measure used in this study offered a special advantage in making available summary data from 1965 (see Appendix C), These prior groups were the 1965 teachers entering the Teaohers' Environmental School, and the teachers who had attended the 196^ TES and were then measured one year later. Data are not available for current statistical analyses comparing the earlier groups with the groups measur­ ed in this study, but both groups scored close to their later counterparts as shown in Table 3• table 3 ATTITUDE MEASURE SCORES BY CROUPS First Response (E) Year Group N Mean .95 C.I. Second Response {G) sd 1964 ti Mean 105 107.18 .95 C.I. sd 1965 2kl 104.76 1978 123 102.30 99.8 3 - 1 0 4 . 7 7 13.82 53 104-34 1 0 1 .5 6 -1 0 7 . 1 2 10.08 1979 77 105.32 1 0 2 .6 9 - 1 0 ? . 7 6 10.71 kz 107.74 104.45-111.02 10.53 Reliability of the attitude measure was estimated using coefficient alpha (Cronbach). Consistently high values for each group and combined groups, 0.8^8 and higher, suggested consistency sufficient for the purposes of this study. Factor and item analysis revealed that the 32-item measure tended to group 17 items into two principal factors 31 having correlations of 0.8^5 and 0.7^9 with the total measure. The effects of these separate factors are noted subsequently. The two principal factors of the total attitude measure may be expressed in summary statements. Factor 1 . The use of effective environmental protection measures will not slow progress in our country. Environ­ mentalists have been unfairly accused of being too cautious and standing in the way of progress. On the contrary, most environmentalists communicate needed information about our resources. We cannot rely on science to find substitutes for natural resources when the original supply is exhausted and we cannot move on to other areas when resources in one area are used up. Conservation of natural resources can bring results which will benefit people today, not just future generations. If w e , as students, take part in environ­ mental conservation, we will receive valuable results from our labors. Although I am only one person, I can do something to improve the environment. I am willing to trade some of my own social activity time to further the cause of the environment. (Questions 6, 8, 10, 1 7 t 18, 23, 25, 26, 27*) Factor 2 . The great enemy of the environment is indif­ ference on the part of the people. We show selfishness and lack of consideration in wasting our resources; we are an extremely wasteful nation. The public schools of our nation should help by spending more time in environmental education. Environmental education should also leave the classroom and be studied in the field where it will be generally more effective. Some businesses are against environmental protection measures because they feel the measures will restrict 7 32 their activities. But, if we do not take effective environmental protection measures, our country will begin to weaken and decline as a major world power. (Questions 9, 15, 20, 2 k , 30, 31, 33, 37-) For convenience, factor 1 may be labelled the environmental conservation factor and factor 2 as the socio-political factor. The 15 excluded items slightly elevated the total- measure score and reduced the standard deviation, an expected consequence of the demand-response characteristics of those items . The interest is in change over t i m e . The t-test data in Table k suggest that there is no statistically significant difference using the total measure or either of the two factors as the bases for comparison. TABLE 4 ATTITUDE MEASURE COMPARISONS, TOTAL MEASURE AND FACTORS, t-TESTS N Mean Bd Total Measure 19?8E 197SG 123 102.30 104.34 13-82 10.08 1.88 .011 174 0.97 .167 53 77 42 105.32 107.74 10.71 1.03 ,924 117 1.18 .120 123 53 30.53 30.64 5.17 4.40 1.38 .191 17^ 0.14 .890 77 42 31.42 4.32 1.18 .523 117 0.82 .412 32.12 4.70 123 53 15-91 16.26 2.72 2.04 1.77 .021 17^ O .85 •397 77 42 25.47 26.24 3.37 3-31 1.04 .921 117 1.20 .233 1979E 1979G Factor 1 1978E 1978G 1979E 1979G Factor 2 1978E 1978G 1979E 1979G F t Groups Paired P df P 10.53 33 Perceived Content The scope of environmental education as perceived by the teachers studied was measured by the list of schoolsubject areas in item 1 of the questionnaire and listed in Table 5* TABLE 5 PERCEIVED CONTENT RANK Percentage of respondents selecting each subject for inclusion Subject Area All Groups 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Conservation Ecology Nature Study Outdoor Education Biology Geology Botany Zoology Agriculture Geography Chemistry Economics Health Science Nutrition Animal Husbandry History 99-OfS 98.6 96.3 95.3 92.5 100. OJS 98.4 97.6 96.7 93-5 8 7 .O 87.8 83-7 76.4 66.7 97- 4* 100.0 96.1 94.8 100.0% 98.1 96.2 9 6.2 97-60 97-6 92.9 90.5 95-2 90.5 90.5 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Family Management Sociology Business Political Science Physics Vocational Educ. Physical Education Psychology 25 Art 26 Mathematics 27 Language 28 Music 87.8 87.1 B3.7 8 0 .O 73*6 66.4 62.7 60.0 57.6 56.9 54.9 51*9 50.5 48.1 4B.1 47.8 46.1 41.7 38.6 34.9 33-9 26.4 22,4 62.6 54.5 53.7 52.8 48.8 45.5 43.1 39.0 40.? 38.2 39-0 44.7 38.2 27.6 33-3 27.6 23.6 16.3 92.2 88.7 96.1 90.9 90.9 85-7 85.7 70.1 66.2 75.5 77.4 75.5 75.5 67.9 62.3 62.3 50.9 52.8 52.8 70.1 71.4 67.5 59-7 6 3 *6 53-2 53-2 66.2 46.8 57-1 49.4 40.3 46.8 32.5 31.2 56,6 69.8 50.9 49.1 50.9 54.7 39.6 43.4 34.0 39.6 28.3 28.3 18.9 20.8 81.0 85-7 78.6 83-3 71.4 71.4 57.1 59-5 61.9 64.3 61.9 57.1 59.5 50.0 52.4 33-3 50.0 38.1 35-7 33-3 26.2 The frequency ranking of each topic is presented in Table 5 with each of the four groups compared to a rank order determined by the total population. There is consensus in giving high priority to the first nine topics with particular 3^ emphasis on the first five: Conservation, Ecology, Nature Study, Outdoor Education, and Biology. These rankings cor­ respond with most traditional bases for an approach to environmental education. There is also consensus, although more variable, in the bottom-of-the-list ranking. table 6 PERCEIVED CONTENT, NUMBER OF TOPICS CHOSEN BY GROUP mean sd range All Groups 1978E 1979E 197SG 1979G 17-43 ?. 12 4-28 16.17 19.38 7.20 16-55 7.18 4-28 14.56-18-53 18.67 7.29 4-28 16.39-20.94 42 6.72 4-28 5-28 17.74-21.01 l4.97-17-37 .95 C.I. N 295 modes 77 123 12 ( 6#) 15 (12#) 20 (10#) 28 (1 3 #) 28 (25#) 53 16 < m 28 (18#) 28 (13 #) 28 (26 #) Table 6 compares the average number of topics chosen by each group. Outstanding is the high percentage choosing all 28 topics as important to environmental education. Equal­ ly important is that 75 "to 85 percent have a less than holistic view, as measured by this item. table ? PERCEIVED CONTENT COMPARISON t-tests by groups Groups Paired N 1978E 1978G 1979E 1979C Mean sd 123 53 16.17 16.55 6.72 77 42 19.38 18.6? 7.20 7.29 F P df t P 1.14 •552 174 0.33 .368 1.03 .906 U7 -0 . 5 1 .305 7.18 35 When the groups are compared statistically, as in Table 7, the differences between entry and subsequent views do not appear to have changed. "Crisis" View A third measure of environmental attitude was a much more general o n e . It was posited during questionnaire con­ struction that there would be a difference in view toward the seriousness of a problem when that problem was narrowly de­ fined and when it was broadly described. A rating question was posed concerning environmental problems in general. Ecology and environment have become household words in recent y e a r s . How do YOU view the "environmental crisis" we hear so much about? There was a strong likelihood for bias in responses to this question in light of the environment in which the entry responses were made and the assumed predisposition of the mail responders. Figure 1 and Table 2 show a high per­ centage of each group considered the "environmental crisis" a serious problem. Partly due to this high-value initial response, the slight increase was not significant (Table 8). TABLE 8 "CRISIS" VIEW COMPARISON, t-tests by groups Groups Paired N 1978E 197BG 122 1979E 1979G 76 39 53 Mean F sd P df t P 2.75 2.77 0.47 0.4? 1.01 .976 173 0.25 .400 2.84 0.40 1-71 .072 .226 0.31 113 0.75 2.90 Rangei 0=No Problem to 3=Serious Problem 36 Personal Environmental Actions Self-reports of environmentally supportive behaviors were acquired in four general categories. Public defense of environmental views needed no more than vocalization to receive an affirmative response. The attempts to influence which were itemized would extend beyond customary personal activities and interpersonal exchanges, requiring some know­ ledge and ability to communicate knowledge. Participation in public projects would expect overt action and social approval. Waste recycling could be performed more anonymously, while retaining social sanction and requiring action. These latter two categories might also reflect teacher activity in their promotion. TABLE 9 PERSONAL ACTIONS PROFILE Percentage Participation in Environmentally Favorable Actions Participation percent 1978E 1979E 52.5 58.it 66.0* ^7*5 23.6 36.it 31.2 17.1 2 6 .it it3.h* 17.0 it?-5 33-3 13.8 Participate in Public Projects 69.9# 8it.it 81.1 80.0 Actively Recycle Wastes 63 M 81.8 83.0 87.2 Publicly Defend Views Attempt to Influence! Local Government Legislation Non-gov't Institutions * change significant at less than p = . 0 5 # before Michigan's "bottle law" 1978G 19790 30.0 22.0 37 The foremost changes to note in Table 9 were the inclination to express personal views and the probable effects of Michigan's "bottle law" prompting more recycling activity and increased participation in cleanup campaigns. The increase in public defense of their environmental views by the 1978 group was significant (at p=.Ol) but the decrease in the 1979 group was not. Apart from statistical significance, the general increase in attempts to influence public and non-public bodies was important: the 1978 group average increased from 23-6 to 28.9 percent participation and the 1979 group climbed from 28.2 to 33-2 percent. The subdivisions of participation in community projects and personal activity in waste recycling are elabo­ rated in Table 10. The question allowed more than one answer so the several combinations are included. Other categories could have been used but the three chosen, cleanup campaigns, beautification projects and environmental protection projects, were considered as typically common classifications and sufficiently all-inclusive to offer meaningful responses. No attempt was made to clarify the meaning of environmental protection project; it was included to encompass any activi­ ties requiring more intensive "feelings" about the environ­ ment than would be required by community cleanup and beautification projects. Caution is needed in the interpretation of responses to this item. These projects are generally sponsored and organized by community groups or whole communities. 38 Participation would, able. then, depend on the opportunities avail­ Lack of participation may be a function of the community rather than the individual. TABLE 10 PROJECT PARTICIPATION PROFILE Percentage Participation by Subdivision Participation percent 1978E Public Projectsi None Cleanup campaigns Beautification projects Environmental protection Cleanup and beautify Cleanup and protection Beautify and protect Clean, beautify, protect 1979E 19?8G 19790 30.1 15-6 18.2 18.9 24-5 20.0 22.8 8.1 4.1 ll*.6 5-7 1.6 13.0 3*9 3-9 11.7 20.8 2.6 23.1* 11-3 13-2 17.5 2.5 7-5 22.5 15-1 1.9 7-5 5.0 15-1 17.5 17.0 12.8 ---- 5-1 7.7 5-1 17.9 5-1 23.1 * Regularly Recycle Wastesi None Paper Bottles Cans Paper and bottles Paper and cans Bottles and cans Paper, bottles and cans 36.6 21.1 5-7 — 22.0 .8 .8 13.0 18.2 3-9 13-0 2.6 6.5 3-9 24.? 27.3 20.8 ---- 15-1 1.9 H.3 34.0 23.1 * before Michigan’s "bottle law" It is apparent from Table 10 that beautification projects, alone, lost favor. There seemed to be a stronger tendency to become involved in cleanup campaigns and projects falling under the rubric of environmental protection, with perhaps a strong overlap in perception between these two. There was also an apparent trend toward involvement in more than one form of activity if there was any activity at all. 39 Recycling was undoubtedly influenced by the imposition of the "bottle law" in Michigan, enacted between the two entry t imes. There was also a strong tendency to shift from no or narrow recycling to multiple-category recycling. As will be seen later, these increases appeared to be personal, not involving a teacher-directed student activity. Environmental Education Practices Several measures were used to reflect the extent of professional environmental education activity; 1. Perceived number of hours each week on environmental education within the school program; 2. Participation in outdoor learning programs; 3. Frequency with which the teacher involved students in environmental activities outside the school program; 4. Recent attendance at environmental education workshops; 5- Whether the teacher was a member of the Michigan Environ­ mental Education Association, the professional organization of environmental educators in Michigan. The reported decreases shown in Table 11 were unexpected considering the assumed predisposition of those responding. Perhaps the timing drew greater accuracy since the mail survey was received and returned during the school year whereas the entry questioning was conducted during the summer, in the TES surroundings, and dependent on uncertain recall. Membership in the Michigan Environmental Education Association (MEEA) apparently increased immediately after TES 40 attendance then declined from attrition, a point which the MEEA might work to rectify. table 11 ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PRACTICES PROFILE, SUMMARY BY GROUP 1978E Conduct environmental education in school program Average hours per week 0,91 1979E 1.00 1978G O .83 1979G O .78 Conduct outdoor environmental learning in school program Participation percentage 74.8 78.7 74.0 76.3 Involve students in out-of-school environmental activities Participation percentage Average times in last year 59-7 1.8 56.1 2.4 49-0 2.6 43.2 Attendance at environmental education workshops Average times in last year Member MEEA Membership percentage 0 .58 22.8 0.52 16.9 0.62 34.0 3-1 0.95 51.2 Time -per Week An especially pertinent question in attempting to measure environmental education practices was the amount of time these teachers spent environmentally educating students in their classrooms. Evaluation of response patterns leading to the data in Table 12 indicated considerable candor implying modest bias. Perhaps this was partly due to an inability of respondents to anticipate what might be considered the "right" answer. The companion question about average teachers in ij-l their school offered an interesting comparison without special inference in this report. TABLE 12 AVERAGE MINUTES PER WEEK OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 1978E N~123 1979E N= 77 1978G N- 53 1979G N= 42 59-95 57.89 49.54 57-12 46.92 59.22 O-250 21.91-71.92 24 Selfextremes excluded mean sd range .95 C.I. n Selfall respondents mean sd range .95 C.I. n Others mean sd range .95 C.I. n 54.56 68.69 0-300 0-300 40.1?-6B.9it 90 45.25-74.65 72.15 87.18 118.81 0-650 47.68 -9 6 . 6 2 93 25.51 34.51 0-200 17.88-33.14 81 62 138.95 0-800 52.75-121.62 65 19-04 23-24 0-100 1 2 .8 1 -2 5 . 2 6 56 0-300 29.29-69.80 33 89-32 6 6 .54 129.00 0-500 123.02 0-600 46.31-132.34 37 16.85-U6.22 12.93 24.18 33.92 0-150 10.77-37.60 27 11.23 0-35 8 .5 8 -1 7 , 2 8 28 26 A few teachers, mostly those who also identified themselves as specializing in environmental education programs, reported very large time quantities which inflated the mean values. Because of this, two sets of data have relevance and are included in Table 12 and in subsequent correlational analyses» one set reports the average of ordinary respondents in this study and the second includes those circumstances where a specialist may take care of environmental education for the whole school or school district. 42 With time estimates ranging from three-fourths of an hour to one hour per week spent on environmental education in the school program, advocates might be encouraged. However, these times represent from nine to twelve minutes in the five to six hour school day, 2.5 percent to 4 percent. A statistical relationship was found between workshop attendance and the time spent in environmental education. The 1979 group showed, with modest strength, that a tendency to attend several environmental education workshops could explain fifteen percent or more of the reported time in the classroom. TABLE 13 WORKSHOPS AND CLASSROOM TIME Correlations chi square, p gamma eta, time dependent eta^, time dependent 19?6E 1979E 1978G 1979G .1 6 ? .0001 .296 •375 ■321 .1*2? .509 .607 .366 .00? .201* .5 2 A .103 ■39** .155* .275* * significant Out-of-School Activity The intent of the question regarding out-of-school activity was to encompass all activities of an essentially extracurricular nature so as not to exclude rather than to avoid inclusion. Scouts, 4-H and other school-age activities were expected to be included as well as any special functions such as community cleanup campaigns. Specification of students was intended to confine responses to the professional relationship of teacher-pupil. Whereas there were no significant changes in the frequency with which the before and after groups conducted outdoor environmental learning experiences as noted in Table 11, there was decided significance in the tendency to involve students outside of the school program, Table 1*K TABLE 14 OUT-DF-SCHOOL ACTIVITY BY GROUP Participation Percentage and Frequency 197SE Involved students out-of­ school, percentage of participation mean sd .95 C.I. n 59-7 49.3 50.7-68 . 6 119 Involved Btudents out-ofschool, number of times in last year mean sd .95 C.I. n 1979E 1978G 1979G 58.1 49.0* 43.2* 4 9*7 46.6-69*6 74 1.82 2.40 2.26 1.36 1.98-2.83 43 1.39-2.24 71 50.5 3 4 .5 -6 3 . 5 49 2.64# 2.20 1.73-3.55 24 50.2 26.5-60.0 37 3 .0 6 ^ 1.98 2.01-4.12 16 ♦significant Although fewer of these teachers, in both year-groups, involved their students in out-of-school environmental activities, the participating teachers did so a greater number of times to judge from their responses to the second survey. Apparently such extracurricular involvement is found worth repeating once tried. In evaluating this response, it should be kept in mind that the question posed was general in nature and could readily have been interpreted to include a wide variety of 44 activities. There may also have been some overlap with the preceding question about outdoor environmental learning experiences— the most likely being inclusion of class work off the school grounds. TES Attendance Influence Sources which influenced the teachers to attend the Teachers' Environmental School are noted in Table 15• TABLE 15 ATTENDANCE INFLUENCE BY GROUP Percentage Reporting Each Source of Influence Source Influence Percentage Source Colleagues 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 48.4?S 40.3/5 54.?f£ 43.9 % 35.8 31-7 15-1 17.0 26.8 5*7 15-1 5-7 Scholarship availability Meeting academic requirements Other 27.9 24.6 15.6 29-9 24.7 22.1 Mailed notice Newsletters 11-5 10.? 11.7 7.8 5-7 9-1 Administrative encouragement 19-5 17.1 4 .9 4.9 Foremost was the influence of colleagues, not an unexpected finding. An influence hidden in the scholarship availability was that many of the scholarships were offered by groups especially interested in environmental education such as local garden clubs. It is not, then, monetary support that necessarily provided this strong influence, but the encouragement of a special interest group, perhaps perceived as a peer group quite distinct from colleagues. The availability of graduate credit for TES attendance was ^5 a decided value, particularly for younger teachers with academic requirements to fulfill. Use and Perceptions of Mass Media The primary profiles of media use and perceptions are presented in Figure 1. Mean Exposure Hours per Day 0 1 2 Television Radio Newspapers Magazines 1.31 1.26 •70 .62 Objectivity Rank highest lowest if 2 1 3 Magazine writer Newspaper reporter Television news reporter Radio news reporter 1.5 2.3 2.9 3.2 Credibility Rank lowest highest 1 2 3 I 5 6 7 Television documentaries 5-9 Public television Television specials Radio specials National television news National radio newB Local television news Local radio news 5.7 5.5 4.6 4.4 Information Conflict Resolution source use percent 100 None or other Colleagues Newspapers Television Radio Figure 1. Information Source Profile 32# 24# 21# 20# 3# 4.3 3.9 3.8 46 Media Exposure Quantities The time per day spent with each of the four mass media listed shows some interesting distinctions. 1 6 , all respondents are summarized. In Table The data in Table 17 exclude the extreme data points to eliminate those with extra­ ordinary quantities, such as the radio listeners reporting more than half the day with the radio on and those not using media, in order that meaningful comparisons might be drawn. table 16 MEDIA USE, minuteB per day 1978E N=123 1979E N= 77 1978G N* 53 93.05 56.94 82.88-103.21 63.55 43.46 53.62-73-48 78.46 43.92 66.23-90.69 19790 N= 42 Television mean sd . 9 5 C.I. range n 0-300 123 0-150 76 0-150 52 85.46 99-98 53.05-117.87 3-600 39 Radio mean sd .95 C.I. range n 112.99 138.36 88.19-137-79 0-840 122 71.84 50.34 6 0 .3 4 -8 3 . 3 4 0-240 76 59.10 45.09 46.28-71-92 47.85 2?. 80 42.88-52.81 0-120 40.0? 31.21 32.93-47.20 0-150 76 41.76 24.06 35.00-48.53 0-120 51 42.85 49.92 26.66-59.03 42.83 29.06 36.19-49.47 0-150 76 32.26 34.37 29.13 24.80-43.94 0-150 50 94.97 146.90 47.36-142.59 0-900 39 Newspapers mean sd . 9 5 C.I. range n 1 23 0-300 39 Magazines mean sd .95 C.I. range n 42.48 35.25 36.16-48.80 0-240 122 17.25 27.51-37.02 15-60 53 0-150 38 4? TABLE 17 MEDIA USE EXCLUDING EXTREMES, minuteB per day 1978E N=123 1979E N= 77 1978G N“ 53 1979G N= 42 92.76 57-55 82.08-103.44 62.40 42.57 5 2 .6 0 -7 2 . 2 0 0-150 75 (1) 78.46* 43.92 66.23-90.69 67-50 38.03 54.63-80.37 3-150 36 (3) 71.20 59.10 # 45*09 46.28-71.92 0-150 5 0 (0 ) 67.92 46.96 52.03-83.00 0-150 36 (3) 4l.?6 24.06 35-00-48.53 0-120 51 (0 ) 33-75 19.10 27.29-40.21 32.26 32.08* 21.86 24.69-39-48 0-120 36 (2) Television mean sd .95 C.I. range n 0-300 114 (9) 0-150 5 2 (0 ) Radio mean sd .95 C.I. range n 87-74 78.08 73-19-102.30 0-300 113 <9) 50.36 59.61-82.79 0-240 75 (1) Newspapers mean sd .95 C.I. range n 46.27 39-00 26.56 30.00 41.34-51.20 0-120 114 (9) 32.10-45.90 38.26 41.40 26.43 35.32-47.48 0-120 75 (1) 0-150 75 (1) 0-60 36 (3) Magazines mean sd .95 C.I. range n 26,22 33.37-43.14 0-120 113 (9) •significant 17-25 27.51-37-02 15-60 53 (0 ) (x) number excluded as extreme Most apparent was the general decrease in media con­ sumption between entry, mid-summer, and the follow-up reports, during the active school year. Print media use appeared to have achieved a minimal level of between one and one and onehalf hours per day. Newspapers occupied slightly more than half of this ti m e . Combined electronic media had a measure of stability. Radio occupied a little more than an hour, its broader variations perhaps reflecting differences in commuting time. Combined print-media use time was about equal to television it-8 use time for these media consumers. While some of the differences between the populations reported here had statistical significances, the variability represented by the standard deviations and the eta^ values is sufficient that inferences should not be extended to larger populations, as noted in Tables 18 and 19. TABLE IB MEDIA USE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE, All Groups Source Mean Bd df MS F P eta2 15662.40 2407.97 6.504 .0 0 0 .0 6 7 3 270 11279.99 3078.87 2.900 .0 3 5 .031 between within 3 272 1733-50 6 9 1 .1 8 2.500 .059 .027 between within 3 273 1227.47 589-27 2.083 .103 .022 F p eta2 2.534 .1 1 3 .015 5.852 .017 .035 1.074 .3 0 2 .006 2 .298 .1 3 1 .014 0 .3 7 3 .542 .0 0 3 0.108 .7 4 3 .001 0 .9 2 1 .339 .008 3 .365 .0 6 9 .0 3 0 Television 76.57 50.52 between within 3 273 Radio 75-30 62.93 between within Newspapers 41.03 26.51 Magazines 37.16 24.42 TABLE 19 MEDIA USE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE, Paired Groups dr Source Mean 1978E to 1978G Television E G Radio E G Newspapers E C Magazines E G 92.76 78.46 87.74 59-10 46.27 41.76 38.26 3 2 .2 6 57.55 43.92 70.08 45.09 26.56 24.06 26.22 17.25 between within between within between within between within 1979E to 1979G Television E G Radio E G Newspapers E G Magazines E G 62.40 67.50 71.20 67.92 39.00 33.75 41.40 32.08 42.57 38.03 50.36 46.96 30.00 19.10 26.43 21.66 between within between within between within between within sd 1 164 MS 1 161 7304.16 2881.90 28438.64 4859.84 1 163 1 164 715.83 666.45 1295-57 5 6 3 .8 6 1 109 1 109 1 109 1 109 632.68 1694.89 262 .2 2 2429.92 670.44 728.15 211 1 .3 6 627.49 L1-9 Information Sources Evaluation Exposure quantities are revealing and have important influences, but reports of quantity should be tempered with user perceptions of quality. It is reasonable to assume that quality evaluations may have important influences on the receptivity of these teachers to media messages. Ob.iectivity Rank In requesting objectivity ratings, the reporter was emphasized in an attempt to reduce the influence of visual materials and other aspects of visual form. The visual presence and dramatized style of the television reporter would still be operant, but changing the response system to a rank-ordering by objectivity perceptions was thought a reasonable effort to diminish their effects. Straightforward rankings, shown in Table 20, were consistent among the four groups. Between entry and subse­ quent measurements, no changes in order were evident. The only differences of note were the tendencies in both mailresponse groups to bring the electronic media reporters closer together, neither lower nor higher in net ranking. The 1979 entry group differed from its 1978 counter­ part in the extent of perceived difference between the television news reporter and the newspaper reporter, but the gap diminished subsequently. The 1978 after-group did endorse magazine writers more emphatically in spite of a 15 percent reduction in use time. 50 TABLE 20 MEDIA PERCEPTION, OBJECTIVITY RANK AND RATING I9 7 8 E N=123 Magazine writer mean ad .95 c.i. n 1.53 ■97 1-35-1.72 116 Newspaper reporter mean sd .95 C.I. n 1979E N- 77 1978G N= 53 1979G N= 42 1.49 1.28 1 .6 ? 1.01 .77 1.05-1.51 47 1.25-1.74 69 2.43 .B? 2,26-2.59 115 2.24 2.32 .69 .88 1.20 1.26-2.07 36 2.28 .88 2.05-2.59 44 1.97-2.58 36 .96 2.58-2.95 115 2.97 I.07 2.70-3.24 67 2.98 .80 2.73-3.23 43 2.84 1 .14 2.43-3,26 32 3-25 3.24 3.31 .84 3-04-3.57 42 2.97 •90 2.64-3-30 32 2.06-2.41 68 TV News reporter 2.76 mean sd .95 C.I. n Radio News reporter mean sd .95 C.I. n .86 3.08-3.41 113 ■74 3.05-3.43 66 Ranks« l=best, 4=poorest Credibility Rating Respondents were asked to indicate their perceptions of credibility of several subdivisions within the electronic mass media. The seven segment Likert-type scale was labelled Not Credible at one end and Very Credible at the other. Two changes appeared in credibility ratings by the 1979 group, as shown in Table 2 1 . Television documentaries improved their position, from second to first place, and perceptions of national news programs on both media improved. 51 TABLE 21 MEDIA P E R C E P T IO N , C R E D I B I L I T Y RANK AND RATING Television documentary mean sd .95 C.I. n Public television mean sd .95 C.I. n Television specials mean Bd .95 C.I. n Radio Bpecials mean sd .95 C.I. n National television news mean sd .95 C.I. n National radio news mean sd .95 C.I. n Local television news mean sd .95 C.I. n Local radio news mean sd .95 C.I. n 1978E N=123 1979E N= 77 1978G N= 53 1979G N= 42 5-96 1.10 5.75-6.16 117 5-74 1.28 5,44-6.04 74 5.77 1.21 5.42-6.13 48 6.08 5.64 1-33 5.38-5-89 111 5.61 5.81 1.28 5-51-6-11 73 5.46 I.50 5.02-5.90 48 5.46 1.17 5.39-5-83 115 5-2? 1-32 4.96-5.59 73 1.29 5.08-5.84 48 4.68 1.20 4.43-4.93 97 4-50 1.42 4,16-4,84 70 4.42 1.27 4,04-4.81 45 4.38 4.30 1.46 3.96-4.65 73 4.38 1.28 4.00-4.75 48 4.22 4.16 1.19 1.33 3.84-4.4? 71 4.23 1.13 3-90-4.57 1.27 4.14-4.62 115 3 .9 9 -4 . 4 5 109 47 1,09 5.72-6.44 37 5.89 1.30 5-44-6.33 36 5.54 1.48 5.04-6.04 37 4,?6 1.56 4.22-5.31 34 4,78 1.20 4.37-5.19 36 4.74 1.40 4.24-5.23 34 4.00 3.68 1.18 3-78-4.22 114 1.19 3.40-3-97 73 3.jj0-4.17 3.90 1 91 3.66-4.14 110 3.65 3.60 4.12 1-30 3.34-3.96 72 1,14 3-26-3.93 4? 1.20 3.69-4.54 34 Rating* l=Not credible, ?=Very credible 3.83 1.14 3.92 1.20 3.50-4.33 36 52 The ratings demonstrated a three-part distinction: local news coverage was firmly last with public television, documentaries and television specials well in front. Reliability Rating Perceptions of their colleagues' knowledge of environ­ mental matters was tested against other information sources which would be readily or frequently available for question­ ing or reference. The terms up-to-date, accurate and thorough were used in the questionnaire and abbreviated to reliability for convenience in reporting. Source ratings, Table 22, were divided by the res­ pondents into three distinct categories. Special interest publications were ranked highest by all four groups. Professional sources--journals, classes and Extension Service bulletins--maintained their relative positions in a middler ange. General magazines, colleagues and newspapers were ranked closely in last place. The rankings tended to confirm the assumption that thoroughness of coverage was a strong value for these media users. 53 TABLE 22 MEDIA PERCEPTION. RELIABILITY RANK AND RATING 1978E N=123 Special interest publications mean sd .95 C.I. n Professional journals mean Ed .95 C.I. n Cooperative Extension Service bulletins mean sd .95 C.I. n Formal classes mean sd .95 C.I. n 1.92 1.20 1.69-2.14 1 18 2-55 1.46 2.27-2.84 105 2.64 1.25 2.35-2.93 75 2.94 1.50 2 .6 3 -3 . 2 6 91 1979E N= 77 197SG N= 53 1979G N= 42 1-75 1.09 1.49-2.02 69 2.15 1.09 1.82-2.47 48 1.92 1.28 1.49-2.35 37 2.49 2,24 2.91 1.45 2.38-3.43 32 1-37 2.13-2.85 59 1.32 1 .8 2 -2 . 6 5 42 2.84 1-57 2.31-3.37 37 1.86 2.39-3*74 32 3-55 1.48 3.16-3.94 58 2*97 1.54 2.46-3-49 37 3.23 General magazines mean sd .95 C.I. n 4.71 4.70 4.64 1.73 4.33-5-09 83 1-53 4.26-5.14 50 1.59 4.02-5-26 28 Colleagues mean sd .95 C.I. n 4.68 1.62 4.29-5.07 69 Newspapers mean sd .95 C.I. n 4.84 1.60 4.47-5.20 79 Rating! l=first choice, 7=laet choice 3.06 2.83 1.70 2.36-3.30 54 5.21 I.32 4 .8 2 -5 . 6 0 48 5-41 1-52 4.98-5.84 51 5-37 1.60 1.59 2.64-3.81 31 4.83 1.74 4.10-5.57 24 5-21 1.32 4.73-6.01 27 4.70-5.73 4.93 1.80 4.22-5-63 28 5.41 1.68 4.77-6.06 29 28 5^ Conflict Resolution A question specifically intended to explore the relative perceived value of mass media and one source of interpersonal communication was posed. Two premises for the question were immediacy and ready availability. Each of the four sources, radio, television, newspapers, and colleagues, was assumed to be available on a daily or near-daily basis for "consultation." table 23 CONFLICT RESOLUTION SOURCES Percentage Selecting Each Source All groups N=295 1978E N=123 1979S N= 77 1978G N= 53 1979G N= kZ None or other Colleagues Newspapers 32?S 27-3^ 27.3 **3.1* 31.7# Zk 30.9% 25.2 22.0 20.8 13.7 25.5 ZU.U 21 Television Radio 20 20.3 22.1 11.8 26.8 3 1.6 2.6 5.9 Z.k Source 1U.6 From Table 23 it was apparent that initial rankings by the two entry groups were reasonably consistent. Increases in what might be called introspective resolution of conflict (none or other) may well have been an artifact of the mail survey response. The loss of supporters by the colleagues and television in the 1978 group may have been a related transfer. Several statistical procedures, parametric and nonparametric, were used in combination with the major variables in this study seeking sufficient correlations to explain the selection patterns. None were apparent. Other interpersonal sources could have been included 55 in this item but it was assumed that, outside of the house­ hold members, colleagues would be the only interpersonal source available to all teachers any and every day, excepting weekends and holidays. Another assumption was that colleagues would be considered a knowledgeable peer group which could be used to help sort out conflicting information received from other sources. It is true, of course, that the colleagues themselves could generate the conflicting information. Correlations of Media Use and Media Perceptions Relationships between media use and ratings of objectivity and credibility were slight at best. The low values of Kendall’s tau correlation coefficients when relat­ ing these aspects of the total population studied only suggested that television users tended to demean radio and that magazine users were inclined to look askance at all other media, without showing any particular strength of loyalty to magazine writers. When the four groups were separated, as shown in Tables 2k and 25 , relationships which appeared on entry tended to disappear later. Exceptions were the increases in ranking strength of newspaper reporter objectivity by 1978 newspaper readers and magazine writer objectivity by 1979 magazine readers. Credibility perceptions by the groups showed different changes. Radio and newspaper users both tended to place somewhat more credence in television documentaries in the 56 fall, perhaps a fortuitous result of programming preceding survey responses. Magazine users in the 1978 group had apparently discovered the dearth of radio specials, and newspaper readers in this same group confirmed the low rating of national radio n e w s . TABLE 2 4 O B J E C T I V I T Y RANK AND MEDIA USE Rank O rd e r C o r r e l a t i o n s (K e n d a ll)* S i g n i f i c a n t C o r r e l a t i o n s O n ly Medium Objectivity Rank Television Radio Newspapers Magazines 1 - Magazine writer 197BE 1979E 197BG 1979G + .178 - .173 + -233 - .192 2 - Newspaper reporter 1970E 1979E 19780 19790 + .158 - .207 - .194 3 - Television news reporter 1978E 1979E 19780 1979G + .194 - .155 + .226 - .159 - .225 4 - Radio reporter 1978E 1979E 1976G 1979G * c o e ffic ie n ts w ith p not - .268 e x c e e d in g .05 + .181 + .192 + .250 57 TABLE 25 C R E D I B I L I T Y RATING AND MEDIA USE Rank O rd e r C o r r e l a t i o n s (K e n d a ll)* S i g n i f i c a n t C o r r e l a t i o n s O n ly Medium Credibility Rank Television 1 - Television documentary 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 2 - Radio Newspapers Magazines + .168 + .208 Public television 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G + .150 3 - Television specials 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 4 - Radio specials 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 5 - - - - .185 + .191 + .177 National radio news 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 7 - .1 66 .193 - .175 - Local radio news 1970E 1979E 1978G 1979G * - .193 + .232 Local television news 1978E 1979E 1978G 1979G 6 - .192 National television news 197BE 1979E 1978G 1979G 6 - .143 c o e ffic ie n ts w ith p not ■ - .249 + .194 + .263 y e x c e e d in g .0 5 CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION The populations in this study were self-selected members of the teaching profession who indicated through their attendance at the Teachers' Environmental School interest in their biophysical surroundings, environmental education or both. The decision to attend was profession­ ally based and Influenced by a combination of factors. The leading influence was the School's reputation communicated by colleagues. This was supported by modest monetary assistance and the implied encouragement of a special interest group, as well as the availability of academic credit. The dimensions of central interest were measured before and after the intensive environmental education experience to seek out changes in attitudes toward the environment, personal actions favoring environmental matters, perceptions of the scope of environmental education, profes­ sional behaviors in environmental education, and use of communication sources for information about environmental affairs. 58 59 The groups surveyed wert, intended to represent those teachers who committed their time resources to an environ­ mental learning experience directed toward professional development. The design corresponds with the pre-experimental pretest-posttest of Campbell and Stanley C19^3► P* 8) using two groups rather than one. Environmental Attitudes The attitude profile of the groups measured in this study, Figure 1 and Table 2, suggest limited effect over time of any attitude enhancement resulting from attendance at the Teachers' Environmental School. Attitude Measure Teachers in this study showed a strongly favorable attitude toward environmental affairs when questioned about specific action and issue attitudes. When no action attitudes were required and issues were not defined, the strength of attitude was even higher. Such findings agree with the expectations suggested from Weinstein's studies (1972) and Leftridge and James (1980 ), reflecting also the situational variability and antecedents of Schuman (1972) and Grunig and Stamm (1979) in taking compromise positions when both issue values and action values were combined in a single attitude statement. Attitudes may be expected to change over t i m e , There was little indication that teachers entering the TES underwent 60 expected changes. Part of this may have resulted from the favorable disposition on entry, with the experience serving to reinforce, not change attitudes. George's comparable groups of 1964 and 196 5 showed significant differences (at p=.01) but his data treatment included specific-knowledge questions excluded from this study. With the data available here, it appears that the change found by George was in the fund of information related to resources rather than in attitudes a l ., 1980 ). (cf. Burrus-Bammel, et Further, the demand-response items included in the attitude portion of the measure, 15 of ‘the 32 items, served to inflate the scores and reduce the within-group variance. The result of including the additional items led to a finding of differences not supported in this study. There is strong indication that the expected attitude change over time did not occur to a significant or important extent, or the attitudes returned quickly to near former levels. The populations were characterized by environmentally favorable attitudes on entry, 80 and 82 percent favorable response, so that changes would be expected to be relatively small. Items which did not factor-load influenced results toward a suggestion of significant change not supported by comparisons of the factors. Perhaps the favorable disposition toward environmental conservation evidenced by attendance at the Teachers’ Environmental School had reached a practical plateau at the time of arrival. 61 Crisis View The strongly expressed view that the environmental "crisis" is serious was expected. The findings supported the contention that a broadly stated question consonant with the predisposition would achieve a favorable response notably higher than a series of more narrowly defined questions. Content Perception The Michigan Department of Education stated that . . . environmental education is total and comprehensive in its scope; it is part of all subject areas and should be included at all grade levels . . . (Michigan Depart­ ment of Education, 1973. pp* 4-5) This survey indicated that teachers did not necessarily support the official stance, or had not heard it. Nor was their perception of content appropriate to environmental education especially different after an experience designed to expand their views. remarkably stable. Indeed, their perceptions were While an overall average of 18 percent reported that all subjects were included in their concept of environmental education (see Table 6), they did not exhibit this view in their professional practices. Perhaps the disparity and the lack of correlation between perceived scope and classroom practice was limited by the range and kinds of subjects taught. Attitude Relationships Analysis of variance comparing before and after scores from both the perceived content and the attitude 62 measure showed variation within the groups greater than variation between the groups for both 1978 and 1979 popula­ tions, with probabilities ranging from 0.24 to 0.74. Rank order correlations of these two dimensions revealed a greatest tau value of 0.27 (p=.00l) for the 1979 group, hardly a promising relationship. It was anticipated that those teachers reporting all or nearly all of the subject matter areas as appropriate to environmental education would also score high on the attitude measure. Statistical analysis did not support this assumption. Personal Environmental Actions The statements comprising the attitude measure used in this study were value-laden, often combining cognitive, affective and behavioral elements. Such a composite measure is usually an unreliable predictor of overt behavior (Weinstein, 1972). To determine if these populations, self­ selected for interest in environmental matters, expressed their declared attitudes through environmentally supportive behaviors, action reports were acquired. The four categories of personal involvement reflected public and private actions in verbal and physical forms with and without direct socialsystem influence (Gross and Niman, 1975i Steininger and Voegtlin, 1976). Public defense of their environmental views was not especially popular. There was, however, a general increase 63 in the attempts to influence governmental and non-government­ al institutions regarding environmental matters. Participation in publicly organized projects appeared to have achieved a measure of stability with about twenty percent non-participation. Active teachers tended to be involved in both cleanup campaigns and projects they perceiv­ ed as contributing to environmental protection. It is likely that these two overlapped in conduct and in perceptions with variations in specific activity percentages dependent on opportunity and recognition of opportunity. The quiet, partly anonymous actions of recycling, supported by legislation, received more than 80 percent endorsement. Social approval would have been widely evident with the passage at that time of the publicly initiated can and bottle return law. It appeared that these teachers were encouraged by public acknowledgement and policy but private actions without direct influence of the social system were not common. Environmental Education Practices About three-fourths of the teachers in this study conducted some form of environmental education in their school program, concentrating primarily on outdoor learning experiences. Whereas classroom time was reported as only nine to twelve minutes per day, the tendency of teachers to instruct in "units" may have concentrated the environmental “unit" into one class period per week. This may be effective 6U- instruction, but it is not total and comprehensive and part of all subject areas as stated by the Michigan Department of Education. Perhaps the lack of breadth in the school program was due to a perceived low level of competency and consequent avoidance. Attendance at the Teachers' Environmental School may have reflected a desire to improve that competency. The correlation between workshop attendance and classroom time tends to support this view, not necessarily in conflict with the views of Borden and Schettino (1979) since the correla­ tion values suggest that workshops supported current teaching rather than being used as preparation for new teaching in the environmental education realm. There were no significant changes in professional practices in the school program. Relationships with Perceived Content The amount of time spent in environmental education in the classroom was expected to correlate with perceptions of the scope of environmental education. no correlation, before or after. In fact, there was Only one relationship of significance and value was uncovered. Analysis of variance showed the 1979 group with a relationship between content perception and tendency to conduct outdoor learning exper­ iences, at p = .0 5 , of eta^=0.56 before and eta^=0. 63 after, probably an ordinary flux, in practices or in recall. 65 Relationships with Attitudes Explorations of relationships between professional practices and attitudes revealed no correlations at p=. 0 5 » before or after, with the overall measure or either of the two principal factors. Use and Perceptions of Mass Media There has been considerable discrepancy in the views of environmental communication authorities previously cited toward the effects of mass media on environmental attitudes. In spite of abundant evidence that there is no relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitudes, there is underlying agreement that information is the basis for beliefs which lead to both attitudes and behaviors. All four groups were moderately heavy consumers of all four media reporting an overall average of 3.89 hours per day. Summary inspection of objectivity and credibility rankings immediately suggested a preference for those presen­ tations which explored a topic in depth. This thorough coverage and dedication to their special interests weighed heavily in evaluations of the media. (Cf. Greenberg and Roloff, 197^; Wilson and Howard, 1978.) No special preferences were indicated for resolving conflicts in information received about environmental matters. These teachers apparently relied on knowledge already acquired or on less immediate and ubiquitous sources. 66 Conflicts which were encountered may have been ignored or judged irrelevant to themselves (Leftridge and James, 1980). Or perhaps only the information which reinforced existing attitudes and beliefs or served a self-centered special interest was selected for acquisition. Relationships with Attitudes Support for the contention that information is the basis for beliefs may be discovered in a correlation between intensity of magazine use and perception of environmental education content scope. Kendall's tau values of 0.138 (p=.02) for the 1979 group as a whole and 0.22? (p=.0l) for the 1978G group suggested a meaningful relationship. However, it was at least as likely that those with a tendency toward a holistic view of environmental education were more avid consumers of the breadth and scope of coverage available in magazines. (Cf. Kippax and Murray, 1980; Palmgreen, et al., 1981.) There is no evidence to support a relationship b e ­ tween use of any medium and the score on the attitude measure­ ment instrument or either of its principal factors. Nor is there any apparent relationship of mass media use patterns with choices of media sources for resolving conflicts in information received. One is led to conclude that all sources report the same information or that all sources may be considered suspicious with the conflict becoming, in the end, 6? one between beliefs already held and input from external information sources. Tests of Hypotheses Statistical methods were applied in testing the hypotheses posed in Chapter II. The specific tests chosen were based on the nature of the data collected and the needs of the hypothesis statements. Additional statistics were used where they might add substance to the test statistic. In comparisons and tests of relationships, a critical value at 0.05 significance was chosen in order to maintain the power of the tests to reject false hypotheses yet avoid Type I errors. Hypothesis 1 . No significant differences were found in environmental attitudes before and after an intensive environmental education experience: Fail to Reject the Null Hypothesis. In addition, the data suggest that no signifi­ cant differences would be found in re-analysis of the 1964 and 1965 groups based on the same population selection procedures and follow-up questioning; the 1965E and 1964G measurements fall between the scores of 1978 and 1979Hypothesis 2 . No significant differences were found in perception of the scope of environmental education follow­ ing an intensive environmental education experience: Fail to Reject the Null Hypothesis. This investigation also confirmed 68 a continuation of the traditional emphasis in environmental education on the biophysical subject areas. Hypothesis 1 . No significant differences were found in the overall tendency toward personal actions favorable to the environment: Fail to Reject the Null Hypothesis. Here, however, some shifts were found in details of activity, especially in conforming to a legislative mandate, so that a substantive judgment was necessarily applied in reaching the overall conclusion. Hypothesis With reservations, no significant differences were found in professional environmental educa­ tion practices before and after an intensive environmental education experience: Fail to Reject the Null Hypothesis. The slight real decline in perceived time spent on environ­ mental education in the classroom (not statistically significant) may have been a function of the curriculum structure. The significant decrease in out-of-school activity was nonetheless slight and may have been due to timing— fall has been traditionally less amenable to out-of­ school environmental activity than spring. Frequency in out-of-school activity was significantly and meaningfully higher. These last two indicate fewer teachers doing more out of school. The hypothesis tests were tempered with logic to arrive at the conclusion of no significant change overall. 69 Hypothesis 5 . The populations indicated no source preference from those made available by the instrument for resolution of conflicting information about environmental matters and there were no subsequent changes of statistical significance: Fail to Reject the Null Hypothesis. Departures for the "All Groups" pattern were sufficient to warrant additional study but were assumed here to be confounded by shifts of interpretation or other indirect caprice, a judgment substantiated by failure of choices to correlate with media use or media evaluation patterns. Hypothesis 6 . No significant differences were found in perceptions of environmental information quality of the mass media before and after the TES experience: Fail to Reject the Null Hypothesis. Additionally, no significant relationships were found between perceptions of quality and environmental attitudes expressed by the populations. This lack of significant relationships held when comparing the higher-use levels of the summer seasons and the lower-use levels of November with attitudes measured at the same time. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This study was developed to compare attitudes r actions and communication behaviors of selected groups of teachers before and after an intensive, residential, environ­ mental education workshop experience. It was expected that some of the findings would link changes in these character­ istics to the experience. The population selected was to enter an environmental education experience designed to assist teachers in beginning or improving environmental education in their classrooms. The curriculum is . . . focused on providing teachers with an understanding of critical issues dealing with the relationship between man and his environment. Teaching techniques will be discussed by teachers who have put them into practice and special emphasis will be placed on relevant programs for the metropolitan areas where most of us live. (Teachers' Environmental School, 1978 and 1979* descriptive brochure.) Two groups of teachers were measured by questionnaire on several dimensions at the beginning of the workshop experience, one in the summer of 1978 and the second in the summer of 19 79- The same teachers were measured again, by mail in November 1979* using the same questionnaire. This investigation was built on an entry profile of the 1978 group of teachers reported by Covert in 1980. 70 A 71 second group was added, the 1979 population, to provide a hroader base for analysis. With the second responses request­ ed from both groups at the same time, two time intervals became available, approximately four months and sixteen months after departure from the T E S , Summary of Results The results from this research indicated that there were no significant changes in environmental attitudes, environmentally favorable personal actions, perceptions of or practices in environmental education, or communication behaviors in either group. In summarizing the first study, statements were made that a favorable attitude toward the environment did not necessarily indicate a likelihood of personal actions or classroom practices which would promote the environmental cause. The current study reinforces those conclusions. Attitudes Environmental attitudes were remarkably stable. Increases in average scores were between 2.0 and 2.3 percent, including those scores from similar groups in 1964 and 1965* The implication is that teachers entering the TES had reached an attitudinal plateau with little probability of change. This implication was reinforced by finding no changes in perceptions of the content of environmental education, another aspect of attitude, despite an avowed purpose of the School to expand teachers' perceptions of scope. 72 Personal Actions Although there was no change of significance in the tendency to take environmentally favorable action and no correlation between attitudes and personal actions, one consistency stands out. When the attitude measure was expressed in percentages, the group scores clustered in the low 80s. Those actions which were overt and sanctioned by the local community also clustered as percentages in the low and middle 80 s. While lacking statistical significance, there was clearly a substantive significance. Whatever the reasons for activity, the groups as a whole did take affirm­ ative personal actions commensurate with their attitudes. On the personal level, reluctance to verbalize their views seems less important than willingness to take action. Professional Perceptions The pattern of conduct and the perceived scope of environmental education apparently change little over t i m e . There is no basis for judgment as to the quality changes which may have occurred. This study confirms many others in finding a tendency to concentrate what is called environment­ al education into outdoor learning activities or into unitized environmental studies in the classroom. The holistic approach appeared to be little more than theoretical. Confining learning activities to biology and nature study is perhaps safer for teachers from two standpoints. It is factual knowledge, readily demonstrable or inferred, 73 and supported by textbook information generally considered not controversial. And, nature study is unlikely to conflict with either personal or community value systems. Information Sources The teachers in this study exhibited an expected selectivity in attention and perception by indicating special preference for those mass media offerings which presented information in depth and which were directed at their special interests. They also appeared to rely more on existing, stable or internal sources for the resolution of conflicts in information received than on those sources reflecting the daily flow of information. (Kippax and Murray, 1980.) Recommendations The information developed in this study suggests that the Teachers’ Environmental School has functioned to reinforce or stabilize existing value systems and practices. However, the school offers an important opportunity to expand the effectiveness of environmental education programs directed specifically at teachers and prospective teachers. Those teachers who committed themselves to an intensive, week-long experience in environmental education indicated a substantial predisposition, 80-plus percent, to take environmentally favorable personal action when there was opportunity to do so. Three-fourths of them conducted outdoor learning and half involved their students in 7^ out-of-school environmental activities. There is, then, reason to believe that an important number of these teachers would take advantage of additional or redirected opportunity to takd action. These findings and implications, together with the conclusions of Cummings (19?6) and Bozardt (1975*1976), lead to recommending that the Teachers' Environmental School modify its approach to the teaching of teachers. Specifical­ ly, the TES would serve well as a training experience for teachers who would then conduct in-service workshops for teachers in their own schools and school districts. Promotion and organization of such workshops could be effectively supervised by the TES as an entity or by the universities which conduct its programs. There is considerable evidence that classroom teachers readily use relevant, thoroughly prepared, pre-packaged mater­ ials when they have learned how to use them. In-service workshops conducted by TES graduates could not only provide this direct assistance in the use of existing materials but offer methods for integrating environmental education into other areas of the curriculum , particularly the social sciences, perhaps generating new materials. {DuShane, 197^-; Ritz, 1977; McCaw, 1979/80.) Implications for Future Research Teachers and their student audiences seem to accept environmental education when it is based on biophysical 75 systems, especially when outdoor learning experiences are involved. The goals expressed by environmental educators are, however, much broader (Johnson, 1977s Hungerford, et al., 1980). The reasons for these differences between stated goals and classroom practices need intensive study if the discrepancies between theory and practice are to be overcome. Further, with an abundance of goals statements, there is little work which effectively translates these goals into practical classroom action other than in the biophysical sciences. It would be especially useful to develop methods for converting theory into practices which classroom teachers could and would apply. (Hepburn and Keach, 197^-) Another question deserving study is the extent to which these or similar teachers reflect the attitudes and personal actions of teachers in general. And, do they to any degree reflect through specific factors or relevance or resource commitment the general citizenry of the communities from which they come. Beyond the school setting, research needs to be focused on interactive systems of teachers, students and parents. Extension of the studies of Foerstel (1976) and McTeer (1978 ) might find why there is so little congruence when comparing environmental problem perceptions of intimately related gro u p s . APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX A THE TEACHERS* ENVIRONMENTAL SCHOOL The "Teachers' Environmental School was born of the need for better understanding of the relationship between man and his environment in these dynamic times." (TES, 1979) Each session was based on the same theme, although each had its own emphasis as indicated in the titles and course des­ criptions . Pertinent excerpts from the descriptions indicate consistency in primary emphasis. Michigan State Universityi Basic Environmental Conservation Concents — Exploring basic concepts to meet goals and objectives of environmental education. Eastern Michigan Universityi Workshop in Conserva­ tion — The focus is on the concept of this Spaceship Earth as an ecosystem and on the impact of man and his technology on the delicate balance of the system. Wayne State Universityi Understanding Our Environ­ ment -- Emphasis will be placed on field studies of the interrelationships of living organisms and their environ­ ment. . . . an opportunity to improve your understanding and attitudes about the environment and p e o p l e . Central Michigan Universityi Environmental Educa­ tion — Tools. Techniques and Philosophy — Encourages the "hands-on" "real experience" method of teaching. Instructor will advocate the broad view of environmental education applicable to teachers in and out of the natural sciences. Enrollees at each workshop could expect to learn concepts and details useful in their professional practice 76 77 of environmental education. The Teachers' Environmental School (TES) is conducted at the Ralph A. MacMullan Conference Center operated by the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Michigan. The center is located in a vacation resort area of Michigan's northern lower peninsula. The setting is especially appropriate for a residential program devoted to environ­ mental conservation education. The staff of each workshop session was composed of university faculty members, sometimes supplemented by graduate assistants, from the sponsoring university. Graduate and undergraduate credits were offered for each session and were interchangeable and transferable among the several partici­ pating universities. The university faculty staffs were augmented and supported by an environmental specialist from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Each TES session began with registration late Sunday afternoon and concluded at noon the following Friday. Sunday evenings were used to acquaint the students with the facili­ ties, the living procedures, the faculty members, the nature of the week's program, and with each other. Instructional programs began early Monday mornings. These populations were selected for study because they were made up of self-selected representatives of the teaching profession who indicated through attendance interest in their biophysical surroundings, environmental education or both. Intensity of this interest and individual motivations 78 for attendance were not determined and may have affected other characteristics measured on an individual-variation basis. Some of the reasons for attendance may have been other than educational. Among these may have been social opportunities, a "painless" way to earn academic credits, an inexpensive vacation week in an outdoor setting combining other amenities with learning opportunities, and a general interest in nature and natural history with intensive "guided tours" available. Post-data-collection interviews by the researcher indicated that the principal reason for attendance was educational, with non-educational purposes secondary. This was in keeping with the 1977 report by Born and Clark indicating that teachers enrolled in environmental education workshops primarily "to learn how to environmental!ze their teaching" and to receive college credit. It is reasonable to assume that teachers attending the TES represent teachers with a higher than average interest in the subject areas encompassed by environmental education. The principal faculty member for each TES session was highly cooperative and encouraged the full cooperation of the respondents without further influencing their responses beyond that which would be expected from the setting. Data Collection Procedures Dr, Robert W. George, principal faculty member of the TES sessions conducted by Michigan State University, arranged 79 with the faculties of the other TES sessions in both 1978 and 1979 to allow data collection at the beginning of each of the sessions. The questionnaire was administered at the conclusion of the Sunday meeting. The researcher was present during the registration and the Sunday evening overview as a non-parti­ cipating observer to evaluate the activities, subjectively judging the potential for contamination of responses. The activities were judged as enhancing the receptivity of those attending with minimal likelihood of direct contamination. Immediately preceding the administration of the questionnaire, the researcher was introduced by the principal faculty member of the session as a graduate student from Michigan State University conducting a research project. The faculty member encouraged the audience to cooperate and offered no other guidance. The researcher briefly introduced, then distributed the questionnaire. Respondents left the room as they completed the questionnaires and handed them to the researcher. The time for completion ranged from 12 to 30 minutes. The groups of teachers were a "captive audience" for the study. The fact of their attendance in an academically- related program assured a high return of the questionnaire and encouraged thoroughness in its completion. The captive situation might have been conducive to unwanted bias in responses, but analysis of the data collected indicated that it was minimal in its overall effects with little reduction 80 in the usefulness of the findings. This claim was supported by the Personal Action data and the self-report of time spent in environmental education. Responses to the subsequently distributed mail survey reinforced this premise. The questionnaire was mailed to all of those persons listed on the attendance rosters for each of the sessions previously measured. First class stamps were used for both the outer envelopes and the enclosed return envelopes. The time for mail distribution was chosen so as to fall well within the school year but before the Thanksgiving holiday. By this time, the classroom and personal activities should have established whatever normal routine would be achieved. The response from the 19?S group was 46 percent and from the 1979 group, 53 percent. A follow-up mailing was not conducted. Middle or late winter would offer a response environment markedly different from that of the first returns. It was assumed that those responding to the first wave questionnaire would represent the most interested teachers, intensifying any differences between before and after measurements. Demographic Description of the Populations Studied The total population attending the sessions in this study was reduced on a single dimension, vocation; all of those not perceiving themselves as teachers were excluded. Some of the respondents perceiving themselves as teachers were not currently active in the classroom. However, as 81 elementary school principals, curriculum coordinators, and administrators in small school districts, they were perceived hy the researcher as having direct influence on environmental education in the schools and appropriate to be included. Post-high school instructors, such as college professors, and those involved in extended education programs were considered to have indirect rather than direct influence on environment­ al education in K-12 schools and so were not included as teachers in this study. The resulting populations reported in this study are described in Table Al. The total of participants may be typified as young, probably without children at home, and tending to have achieved college degrees beyond the bachelor’s. They have lived most of their lives in urban or semi-urban locales with well-established residences in their current communities. Not especially active in civic groups, at least on a formal b a s i s , they are likely to be members of two or more professional organizations. Teaching assignments, past and present, tend to concentrate in the upper elementary grades although there is substantial representation from all grade levels, kindergarten through twelfth. 82 TABLE A1 DEMOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF THE POPULATIONS Population Percentage 1978G 1976E 1979E (n= ?4) 19-34 35-49 50-64 Children in Household (n=1 2 3 ) 54.1 3B.5 7.4 (n=l2 l) No Yes Education Completed 52.9 47.1 (n=1 2 1 ) 57-3 42.7 50.0 (n= 73) Item Age Bachelor's Master'b Ph.D. Youth Life Community City Suburb Small town Country Adult Life Community City Suburb Small town Country Resident Present Community 0 - 5 years 5 - 1 0 years more than 10 years Civic Group Memberships 0 1 2 3 more than 3 Professional Oreanizations 0 1 2 66.2 23.0 8.1 (n= 75) 1979G (n= 53) (n= 42) 54.8 50.9 39.6 33-3 9.5 7_* 5 . (n= 5 2 ) (n= 39) 50.0 61.5 . 38.5 (n= 40) 60.3 38.8 .8 51.3 44.7 (n= 52) 44.2 51.9 (n=1 2 l) (n= 74) 36.4 23-4 20-1. Cattell, R.B. "Extracting the Correct Number of Factors in Factor Analysis." Educational and Psychological Measurement. 18 (1958): pp. 791-837. ________ . "The Scree Test for the Number of Factors." Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1 (1976): PP* 245-76. Chaffee, Steven H. and McLeod, Jack M. "Sensitization in Panel Design: A Coorientational Experiment." Journal­ ism Quarterly. 45 (1968): 661 -6 9 . Childress, Ronald B. "Public School Environmental Education Curricula: A National Profile." Journal of Environmental Education. 9 (Spring 1978): 3* 2-11. Connell, R.W. "Political Socialization in the American Family: The Evidence Re-Examined." Public Opinion Quarterly. 36 (1972): 323-33. Coombs, Clyde H. and Coombs, Lolagene C. " ’Don't K n o w ’: Item Ambiguity or Respondent Uncertainty?" Public Opinion Quarterly. 40 (l9?6-7): 497-51^* Corder-Bolz, Charles R. and O'Bryant, Shirley. "Teacher vs. Program." Journal of Communication. 28 (Winter 1978): 1, 97-103. Covert, Douglas C. "A Profile of Attitudes, Actions and Communication Behaviors of Teachers Entering an Environmental Education Experience." M.S. thesis. Michigan State University, 1980. Cozby, Paul C. Methods in Behavioral Research. Palo Alto, Calif.: Mayfield, 1981. ________ . Professor of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, California State Univ., Fullerton, Calif. Interviews, 1982. 120 Cronholm, Margareta and Sandell, Rolf. "Scientific Informa­ tion! A Review of Research." Journal of Communica­ t i o n . 31 (Spring 1981)s 2, 85-9^* Cummings, Stanley L . , Jr. "Environmental Education! A Market Survey." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Fran­ cisco, Calif., 19-23 April 1976. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 124415, 1976. Davison, W. Phillips; Boylan, James; and Yu, Frederick T.C. Mass Media Systems and Effects. New York: Praeger, 1976. DuShane, Judy. "In-Service Programs for Teachers in Northwest Ohio." Journal of Environmental Education. 5 (Spring 197*0: 3. 12-4. Foerstel, Dietrich K.E. "An Analysis of the Congruence Among Students, Parents, Teachers and Environmentalists' as Related to their Perception of and Solutions to Environmental Problems." Ph.D. dissertation. Univer­ sity of Tennessee, 1976. Friedman, Lucy N.; Gold, Alice R.j and Christie, Richard. "Dissecting the Generation Gaps Intergenerational and Intrafamilial Similarities and Differences." Public Opinion Quarterly. 36 (1972 )1 334-46. George, Robert W. "A Comparative Analysis of Conservation Attitudes in Situations Where Conservation Education is a Part of the Educational Experience." Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University, 1966 . Governor's Environmental Education Task Force. Michigan's Environmental F u t u r e . 2nd ed. Lansing, Michigan: Office of the Governor, 1973* Greenberg, Bradley S. and Roloff, Michael E. "Mass Media Credibility! Research Results and Critical Issues." News Research Bulletin No. 6 . Washington, D.C.t American Newspaper Publishers Assn, Nov. 4, 1974. Gross, Steven Jay and Niman, C. Michael. "Attitude-Behavior Consistency! A Review." Public Opinion Quarterly. 39 (1975): 358-68. Grunig, James E. and Stamm, Keith R. "Cognitive Strategies and the Resolution of Environmental Issues* A Second Study." Journalism Quarterly. 56 (Winter 1979): 4, 715-26. 121 Harvey, Gary Dale. "Environmental Education: A Delineation of Substantive Structure." Ph.D. dissertation. Southern Illinois University, 1976. Hepburn, Mary A. and Keach, Everett T., Jr. "The Impact of Environmentalism on the Social Studies Curriculum." Journal of Environmental Education. 5 (Spring 197^) ’• 3, 15-18. Hess, Robert D. and Torney, Judith V. The Development of Political Attitudes in Children. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books Edition, 1968 . Hounshell, Paul B . and Liggett, L arry. "Environmental Education One Year Later." Journal of Environmental Education. 8 (Fall 1976): 1, 32-5* Howie, Thomas R. "Indoor or Outdoor Environmental Education?" Journal of Environmental Education. 6 (Winter 197^): 2, 32 -6 . Hungerford, Harold R. "Myths of Environmental Education." Journal of Environmental Education. 7 (Winter 1975): 2, 21-fT Hungerford, Harold R.; Peyton, R. Ben; and Wilke, Richard J. "A Framework for Environmental Education Curriculum Planning and Development." Current Issues VI: The Yearbook of Environmental Education and Environmental Studies. Edited by Sacks, Burrus-Bammel, Davis and Iozzi. National Association for Environmental Education, ERIC/SMEAC. Columbus, Ohio: ERIC, 1980. Hunsaker, Alan. "Enjoyment and Information Gain in Science Articles." Journalism Quarterly. 56 (Autumn 1979): 3. 617-9. Johnson, David I. "A Quantitative Comparison of Environmental Education, Conservation Education, Outdoor Education, Ecological Education, Environmental!zed Education and General Education Based on Goals." Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University, 1977. Johnson, Robert R. Elementary Statistics. 3rd e d . Mass.: Duxbury, I 98O. N. Scituate, Kelman, H.C. "Compliance, Identification and Internalization: Three Processes of Attitude Change." Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2 (1958): 51-60. 122 KIppax, Susan and Murray, John P. "Using the Mass Media: Need Gratification and Perceived Utility." Commun­ ication Research. 7 (July 1930): 3» 335-360. Kupchella, Charles E. and Levy, Gary F. "Basic Principles in the Education of Environmentalists." Journal of Environmental Education. 6 (Spring 1975) * 3~* 3"*" Laug, George M. "A Study of Expressed Attitudes of Prospec­ tive Teachers Taking Part in Practical Conservation Activities." Ph.D. dissertation. Syracuse University, I960. Leahy, P. and Mazur, A. "The Rise and Fall of Public Opposi­ tion in Specific Social Movements." Social Studies of Science. 10 (1980): 259-8*)-. Leftridge, L. Alan and James, Robert K. "A Study of the Perceptions of Environmental Issues of Urban and Rural High School Students." Journal of Environmental Education. 12 (Fall 1980): 1, 3“7 ■ Lively, Charles E. and Preiss, Jack J. Conservation Education in American Colleges. New York: The Ronald Press, 1957■ Masters, William D. "The Nature and Scope of Instruction in Conservation of Natural Resources in Grades l-l2 in Central Illinois." Master's Thesis. University of Illinois, 1953* Mazur, Allan, "Media Coverage and Public Opinion on Scientific Controversies." Journal of Communication. 31 (Spring 1981): 2 , 106-1 5 . Mazur, A. and Conant, B. "Controversy Over a Local Nuclear Waste Repository." Social Studies of Science. 8 ( 1978 ) : 2 , 235 - ^ 3 . McCaw, Steven C. "Teacher Attitudes Toward Environmental Education." Journal of Environmental Educati o n . 11 (Winter 1979/80): 2, 18 - 23 . McNelly, John T. "Mass Media and Information Redistribution." Journal of Environmental Education. 5 (Fall 1973)* 1* 31-36. McTeer, J. Hugh. "Teenage-Adult Differences in Concern for Environmental Problems." Journal of Environmental Education. 9 (Winter 19787": 2 ] 20-23. 123 Michigan Department of Education. Environmental Education Guidelines. Lansing, Mich.i Michigan Department of Education, November 1973* Murch, A.W. "Public Concern for Environmental Pollution." Public Opinion Quarterly. 35 (1971): 102-9* Nie, Norman H.; Hull, C. Hadlai; Jenkins, Jean G.; Steinbrenner, Karin; and Bent, Dale H. SPSSt Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. 2nd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975* Nie, Norman H. and Hull, C. Hadlai. York: McGraw-Hill, 1981. SPSS Update 7 - 9 . New Nunnally, Jum C. Psychometric Theory. 2nd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978. Palmgreen, Philip; Wenner, Lawrence A.; and Rayburn, J.D.,11. "Gratification Discrepancies and News Program Choice." Communication Research. 8 (Oct 1981): 4, 451-78. Pettus, Alvin. "Environmental Education and Environmental Attitudes." Journal of Environmental Education. 8 (Fall 1976)7 1, 48-51* Peyton, Robert Ben. "An Assessment of Teachers' Abilities to Identify, Teach and Implement Environmental Action Skills." Ph.D. dissertation. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 1977* Quaintance, Charles W. "Conservation Education in the Schools and Colleges of the United States." Ph.D. disserta­ tion. Cornell University, 1940. Ramsey, Charles E. and Rickson, Roy E. "Environmental Knowledge and Attitudes." Journal of Environmental Education. 8 (Fall 1976): 1, 10-18. Ray, M.L. "Marketing Communication and the Hierarchy of Effects." In P. Clarke (ed.) New Models for Communi­ cation Research. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1973* Remmers, H.H. Introduction to Opinion and Attitude Measure­ ments . New York: Harper and Bros., 1954. R i t z , William C . "Involving Teachers in Environmental Educa­ tion." Journal of Environmental Education. 8 (Spring 1977)* 3» 40-47. 124 Roth, Robert E. "Conceptual Development and Environmental Education." Journal of Environmental Education. 11 (Fall 1979)! l,""6-9. Rummel, R.J, Applied Factor Analysis. Evanston, Ill.t Northwestern Univ. Press, 1970. Schoenfeld, Clay. "The Changing Role of Mass Communication in Environmental Education." Journal of Environmental Education. 8 (Spring 1977): 3* 60-64. Schuman, Howard. "Attitudes vs Actions Versus Attitudes vs Attitudes." Public Opinion Quarterly. 36 (1972): 347-54 . Sellers, Leonard and Jones, David, W.,Jr. "Environment and the Mass Media." Journal of Environmental Education. 5 (Fall 1973): 1, 51-57Sherman, Robert C. "The Conservation Attitudes and Informa­ tion Possessed by Elementary School Teachers in Training." Ph.D. dissertation. University of Missouri, 1950. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1 9 5 ^ Stamm, Keith R. "Environment and Communication." In Current Perspectives in Mass Communication Research, p p . 265-94. Edited by F. Gerald Kline and Phillip J. Tichenor. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1972. Stamm, K.R. and Bowes, J.E.,11. "Communication During an Environmental Decision." Journal of Environmental Education. 3 (Spring 19721 Stamm, K.R. and Ross, J.E. "Rationality of Opinion on a Controversy in Conservation." Journalism Quarterly. 43 (Winter 1 9 6 6 )s 762-5State of Michigan Legislature. 3 June 1971. Senate Concurrent Resolution Number 6 9 . Lansing, Michigan. Steininger, Marion and Voegtlin, Kathleen. "Attitudinal Bases of Recycling." Journal of Social Psychology. 100 (1976): 155-6. Swan, James A. "Response to Air Pollution: A Study of Attit­ udes and Coping Strategies of High School Youths." Environment and Behavior. September 1970: 127-52. 125 Swan, Malcolm. "Forerunners of Environmental Education." In What Makes Education Environmental? Edited by Noel Mclnnis and Don Albrecht. Louisville, Ky.t Data Courier, Inc. and Environmental Educators, Inc., 1975* Tanner, R. Thomas. "Conceptual and Instructional Issues in Environmental Education Today." Journal of Environ­ mental Education. 5 (Summer 197^)•* 48-53* Teachers' Environmental School. Descriptive brochure. Lansing, Michigan: Department of Natural Resources and MEEA, 1978. Teachers' Environmental School. Descriptive brochure. Lansing, Michigan: Department of Natural Resources and MEEA, 1979. Tichenor, F.J. and Bowers, J.K. "Environment and Public Opinion." Journal of Environmental Education. 2 (Summer 1971)* ^ t 38-^3* Tichenor, P.J.j Donohue, G.A.j and Olien, C.N. Community Conflict and the Press. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage 1980 . Trent, John H. "Changes and Trends in Environmental Education (1970-75)*" Journal of Environmental Education. 7 (Spring 1976): 3, 3^-37. Trotter, Edgar P. Professor of Communications, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, California State University, Fullerton, Calif. Interviews, 1982. United States Congress, 91st. October 1970. Environmental Education A c t , Public Law 91-516. Washington, D.C. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Fundamentals of Environmental Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Toward an Action Plan: A Report on the Tbilisi Conference on Environmental Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978. Weinstein, Alan G. "Predicting Behavior from Attitudes." Public Opinion Quarterly. 36 (1972): 355-60. Whiteman, Eldon E. "A Comparative Study of a Traditional and a Specially Designed College Course in Biology Upon Conservation Attitudes." Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University, 1965 * 126 Wievel, Bernard F. "Attitude Toward and Knowledge of Conser­ vation Possessed by Students in Iowa High Schools." Ph.D. dissertation. Iowa State University, 19^7Wileman, Joseph L. "The Extent and Nature of Affective and Cognitive Changes in Teachers and Students as the Result of Participation in an Environmental Education Program." Ph.D. dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1976. Wilson, C. Edward and Howard, Douglas M. "Public Perceptions of Media Accuracy." Journalism Quarterly. 55 (Spring 1978): 1, 73-76. Wint, Dennis M. "Characteristics of Elementary Teachers Implementing an Environmental Curriculum." Ph.D. dissertation. Case Western Reserve University, 1977* Witt, William. "Communication Concepts for Science and Environmental Communications." Journal of Environ­ mental Education. 5 (Fall 1973)* 1, 58-62.