Measuring efficiency of pedagogical strategies in frames of environmental education and substanive development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15291/ai.1205Keywords:
attitude, ecological behaviour, ecology, educational methods, school, studentsAbstract
A famous scientist and ecologist Gilbert warned (1990.) that people are treating planet Earth as a huge garbage bin. Indeed, soil, air and water are polluted in such degree that life in some parts of our planet is questionable. In comparison to these ecological problems Deneshevary with associates (1998) accentuates that the recycling and paper disposal can seem as much less serious problem. It is clear thet an oil stain or toxic waste in the stream can cause much more damage than paper bag carelessly thrown in the water. In this work we are trying to view the problem from another point of view. We are convinced that careless throwing of paper and other garbage can cause more serious forms of unadequate ecological behaviour in the future. From educational and environmental point we think it is the most important to develop student's attitude, i.e. general and longterm thinking about ecology. Our basic goal in this article is: to establish the efficiency of pedagogical strategies that give longterm educational effects, and give permanent ecological behaviour of students. In the purpose of realisation of this goal, we compared the effect of reward as consequent strategy of students' behaviour and aplyed effect of succesive educational procedures: information (of education), returned information and creative work-shops. The results have shown that the reward has very important role in behaviour change of the students, but only during the reward period. The durance of behaviour, that is, the longterm effect of desired behaviour had shown to be much more accentuated with the proces of giving information, returned information and individual students' work in creative work-shops. Given results confirm our assumption that only through systematic development of ecological conscience and students' attitude we can expect in longterm students' desired ecological behaviour, which is very important considering that substantial development of our community faces many serious ecological problems every day.
References
Barg, J. A., Chaiken, S., Raymond, P., Hymes, C. (1996) The automatic evaluation effect: Unconditional automatic attitude activation with a pronunciation task, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, str. 104 – 128.
Berger, I. E. (1997) The demographics of recycling and the structure of environmental behavior, Environment and Behavior, 29 (4), str. 515-531.
Bratt, C. (1999) The impact of norms and assumed consequences on recycling behavior, Environment and Behavior, 31 (5), str. 630-653.
Cifrić, I. ( 1993) Ekološka edukacija i moderno društvo, Socijalna ekologija, (2), str. 235- 247.
Cheung, S. F., Chan, D. K. S., Wong, Z. S. Y. (1999) Reexamining the theory of planned behavior in understanding wastepaper recycling,
Environment and Behavior, 31(5), str. 587-612.
Daneshevary, N., Daneshevary, R., Schawer, R.K. (1998) Solid-waste recycling behavior and support for curbside textile recycling, Environment and Behavior, 30 (2), str. 144-161.
De Houwer, J., Hermans, D., Eelen, P. (1996) Affective and identity priming with episodically associated stimuli, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, str. 2221–2239.
De Houwer, J., Baeyens, F., Eelen, P. (1994) Verbal evaluative conditioning with undetected U.S. presentations, Behavioral Research and Therapy, 32, str. 629 –633.
De Leon, I.G., fuqua, R.W. (1995) The effects of public commitment and group feedback on curbside recycling, Environment and behavior, Vol. 27 (2), str. 233-250.
De Young, R. (1993) Changing Behavior and Making It Stick, Environment and Behavior, 25 (4), str. 485-505.
Fazio, R. H. (2000) Accessible attitudes as tools for object appraisal: Their costs and benefits, u: Maio, G. i Olson, J. (ur.) Why we avaluate: Functions od atitudes (str. 1-36), Mahwah, Nj: Erlbaum.
Gamba, R. J. i Oskamp, S. (1994) Factors Influencing Community Residentes' participation in commingled curbside recycling programs, Environment and Behavior, 26 (5), str. 587-612.
Geller, E. S., Winett, R. A., Everett, P. B. (1982) Preserving the Environment: New Strategies for Behavior Change, New York: Pergamon Press.
Gilbert, B. (1990) Thinking lightly aboutothers: Automatic components of the social inferenceprocess, u: Uleman, J. i Berger, J. A. (ur.) New York: Gilford Press, str. 189-211.
Howenstine, E. (1993) Market segmentation for recycling, Environment and Behavior, 25 (1), str. 86-102.
Porter, B. E., Leeming, F. C., Dwyer, W. O. (1995) Solid Waste Recovery: A Rewiew of Behavioral Programs to Increase Recycling, Journal Environment and Behavior, 27(2), str. 122-152.
Thorgesen, J. (1996) Recycling and morality. A critical review of the literature, Environment and Behavior, 28 (4), str. 536-562.
Uzelac, V. (1996) Programi (sadržaji) izobrazbe nastavnika za okoliš, Socijalna ekologija, 6 (1997), str. 23-26.
Uzelac, V. (1998) Interesi učenika osnovne škole za ekološke aktivnosti, Školski vjesnik, 1, str. 3-13.
Uzelac, V. (2003) Ekologija – korak bliže djetetu, u: Peko, A. (ur.) Dijete i djetinjstvo: teorija i praksa predškolskog odgoja, Osijek: Visoka učiteljska škola, str. 409.
