Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

FEN BİLGİSİ ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ ÇEVRE KİMLİKLERİNİN VE ÇEVRE DOSTU DAVRANIŞLARININ İNCELENMESİ

Year 2020, Volume: 33 Issue: 3, 749 - 777, 07.12.2020
https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.660668

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Fen Bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının çevre kimliklerinin ve çevre dostu davranışlarının incelenmesidir. Ayrıca bu araştırmayla Fen Bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının çevre kimlikleri ile çevre dostu davranışları arasındaki ilişkinin ortaya konması da amaçlanmıştır. Tarama deseni ile gerçekleştirilen bu araştırmada Erciyes, Ahi Evran ve Gazi Üniversitelerinin Eğitim Fakültelerinde öğrenim gören toplam 980 Fen Bilgisi öğretmen adayı ile çalışılmıştır. Araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak Çevre Kimliği ve Çevre Dostu Davranış Ölçekleri kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen verilerin analizi için yüzde, frekans, ortalama ve standart sapma gibi betimsel istatistikler ile Faktör Analizi, Pearson Momentler Korelasyonu ve Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli gibi açıklayıcı istatistikler kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonucuna göre, Fen Bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının görece güçlü bir çevre kimliğine ve çevre dostu davranışlara sahip oldukları söylenebilir. Bununla birlikte bu araştırmada çevre dostu davranışların yapılmasında çevre kimliği gibi inanç, bilgi, tutum ve davranışsal boyutları bütünsel olarak içine alan bir psikometrik faktörün etkili olduğuna dair önemli veriler elde edilmiştir.

References

  • Berberoglu, G., & Tosunoglu, C. (1995). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of an environmental attitude scale (EAS) for Turkish university students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 26, 40-44.
  • Burgess, J., Harrison, C., & Filius, P. (1998). Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning, 30, 1445-1460.
  • Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Ed.), Identity and the Natural Environment içinde (ss. 45-65). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Identity and the natural environment. London: The MIT Press.
  • Cottrell, S.P. (2003). Influence of sociodemographics and environmental attitudes on general responsible environmental behavior among recreational boaters. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 347–375.
  • Courtenay-Hall, P., & Rogers, L. (2002). Gaps in mind: Problems in environmental education knowledge/behaviour modelling research. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 283-297.
  • Cresswell, J. (2008). Research design. London: Sage Publication.
  • Crompton, T. (2008). Weathercocks and signposts: the environment movement at a crossroads. WorldWildlife Fund, Godalming, United Kingdom. Web adresi: wwf.org.uk/strategiesforchange (Erişim tarihi: 07.05.2011).
  • Diekmann, A., & Preisendoerfer, P. (1992). Persoenliches umweltverhalten: Die diskrepanz zwischen anspruch und wirklichkeit. Koelner Zeitschrift fuer Soziologie und Sozialpsychologi e, 44, 226–251.
  • Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS.. London: Sage Publications.
  • Fisher, J. D., Fisher, W. A., & Shuper, P. (2009). The informationmotivation-behavioral skills model of HIV preventive behavior. R. DeClemente, R. Crosby, and M. Kegler (Ed.), Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research içinde (ss.21-65). San Francisco: Wiley ve Sons.
  • Frankel, J., & Wallen, N. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  • Hungerford, H.R., & Volk, T.L. (1990). changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–21.
  • Jensen, B. (2002). Knowledge, action and pro-environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 325- 334.
  • Kahyaoğlu, M. ve Özgen, N. (2012). Öğretmen adaylarının çevre sorunlarına yönelik tutumlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 5(2), 171-185.
  • Kaiser, F. G. (1998). A general measure of ecological behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 5, 395-422.
  • Kaiser, F.G., & Fuhrer, U. (2003). Ecological behavior’s dependency on different forms of knowledge. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52(4), 598-613.
  • Kaiser, F.G., Wölfing, S.,& Fuhrer, U. (1999). Environmental attitude and ecological behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 1-19.
  • Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayıncılık.
  • Kasapoğlu, A. ve Turan, F. (2008). Attitude-behaviour relationships in environmental education: A case study from Turkey”. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 65(2), 219–231.
  • Kılınç, A. (2010). Can project-based learning close the gap? Turkish student teachers and proenviromental behaviours. International Journal of Enviromental ve Science Education, 5(4), 495-509.
  • Kılınç, A., Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (2011). Turkish school students and globalwarming: Beliefs and willingness to act. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science ve Technology Education, 7(2), 121-134.
  • Kılınç, A., Watt, H., & Richardson, P. (2012). Factors influencing teaching choice (Fit-choice) in Turkey. Asia-Pasific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 199-126.
  • Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.
  • Moore, C. F. (2003). Silent scourge: Children, pollution, and why scientists disagree. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
  • Naess, A. (1995). The deep ecological movement. Deep ecology for the 21st century. Boston: Shambhala Publications. Negev, M., Sagy, G., Tal, A., Salzberg A., & Garb, Y. (2006). Mapping environmental literacy in Israel. 35th Annual NAAEE Conference: Building Environmental Education in Society, St. Paul, MN, The USA.
  • Newhouse, N. (1991). Implications of attitude and behavior research for environmental conservation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 26–32.
  • Nisbet, E. K. L., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41, 715-740.
  • Olivos, P., & Aragonés, J.I. (2011). Psychometric properties of the environmental identity scale. Psyecology, 2(1), 65-74.
  • Önal, N. ve Çakır, H. (2015). Eğitim fakültesi öğretim elemanlarının teknolojik pedagojik içerik bilgilerine ilişkin özgüven algıları. Hasan Ali Yücel Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12-2(24), 117-131.
  • Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
  • Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391-406.
  • Schultz, P. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: Understanding human–nature interactions. P. Schmuck ve P. W. Schultz (Ed.), The psychology of sustainable development içinde (ss. 61–78). New York: Kluwer.
  • Schultz, W., & Tabanico, J. (2007). Self, identity, and the natural environment: Exploring implicit connections with nature. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(6), 1219-1247.
  • Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309-317.
  • Şama, E. (2003). Öğretmen adaylarının çevre sorunlarına yönelik tutumları. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 99-110.
  • Şeker, H., Deniz, S. ve Görgen, G. (2004). Ögretmen yeterlikleri ölçeği. Milli Eğitim Dergisi. 164, 105-118.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Teksöz, G., Şahin, E. ve Ertepınar, H. (2010). Çevre okuryazarlığı, öğretmen adayları ve sürdürülebilir bir gelecek. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39, 307-320.
  • Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2006). Atık Bertaraf ve Geri Kazanım Tesisleri İstatistikleri (2005). Web adresi: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=415. (Erişim tarihi: 05.07. 2011).
  • Yencken, D. (2000). Young people and the environment: The implications for environmentalism. D.Yencken, J.Fien, ve H. Sykes (Ed.), Environment, education and society in the Asia-Pacific içinde (ss. 212-250). London: Routledge.
  • Yılmaz, A., Morgil, İ., Aktuğ, P. ve Göbekli, İ. (2002). Ortaöğretim ve üniversite öğrencilerinin çevre, çevre kavramları ve sorunları konusundaki bilgileri ve öneriler. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22, 156–162.

INVESTIGATION OF PROSPECTIVE SCIENCE TEACHERS' ENVIRONMENTAL IDENTITIES AND PRO-ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIORS

Year 2020, Volume: 33 Issue: 3, 749 - 777, 07.12.2020
https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.660668

Abstract

The present study aimed to examine the environmental identities and pro-environmental behaviors of prospective science teachers. It also aimed to reveal the relationship between environmental identity and pro-environmental behaviors of the participants in the study. The survey research design was employed in the study, the participants of which were 980 prospective science teachers from three different universities in Turkey. The Environmental Identity and Pro-environmental Behavior Scales were utilized as data collection tools. Descriptive statistical analyses, such as percentage, frequency, mean and standard deviation, and inferential statistical analyses such as Factor Analysis and Pearson Moment Correlation were used for the analysis of the data. The analyses revealed that participants' had a relatively strong environmental identity and a relatively high level of pro-environmental behavior. In addition, significant results were obtained regarding the fact that a psychometric factor that incorporates beliefs, knowledge, attitudes and behavioral dimensions such as 'environment identity’ was effective in establishing pro-environmental behaviors.

References

  • Berberoglu, G., & Tosunoglu, C. (1995). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of an environmental attitude scale (EAS) for Turkish university students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 26, 40-44.
  • Burgess, J., Harrison, C., & Filius, P. (1998). Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning, 30, 1445-1460.
  • Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Ed.), Identity and the Natural Environment içinde (ss. 45-65). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Identity and the natural environment. London: The MIT Press.
  • Cottrell, S.P. (2003). Influence of sociodemographics and environmental attitudes on general responsible environmental behavior among recreational boaters. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 347–375.
  • Courtenay-Hall, P., & Rogers, L. (2002). Gaps in mind: Problems in environmental education knowledge/behaviour modelling research. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 283-297.
  • Cresswell, J. (2008). Research design. London: Sage Publication.
  • Crompton, T. (2008). Weathercocks and signposts: the environment movement at a crossroads. WorldWildlife Fund, Godalming, United Kingdom. Web adresi: wwf.org.uk/strategiesforchange (Erişim tarihi: 07.05.2011).
  • Diekmann, A., & Preisendoerfer, P. (1992). Persoenliches umweltverhalten: Die diskrepanz zwischen anspruch und wirklichkeit. Koelner Zeitschrift fuer Soziologie und Sozialpsychologi e, 44, 226–251.
  • Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS.. London: Sage Publications.
  • Fisher, J. D., Fisher, W. A., & Shuper, P. (2009). The informationmotivation-behavioral skills model of HIV preventive behavior. R. DeClemente, R. Crosby, and M. Kegler (Ed.), Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research içinde (ss.21-65). San Francisco: Wiley ve Sons.
  • Frankel, J., & Wallen, N. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  • Hungerford, H.R., & Volk, T.L. (1990). changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–21.
  • Jensen, B. (2002). Knowledge, action and pro-environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 325- 334.
  • Kahyaoğlu, M. ve Özgen, N. (2012). Öğretmen adaylarının çevre sorunlarına yönelik tutumlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 5(2), 171-185.
  • Kaiser, F. G. (1998). A general measure of ecological behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 5, 395-422.
  • Kaiser, F.G., & Fuhrer, U. (2003). Ecological behavior’s dependency on different forms of knowledge. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52(4), 598-613.
  • Kaiser, F.G., Wölfing, S.,& Fuhrer, U. (1999). Environmental attitude and ecological behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 1-19.
  • Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayıncılık.
  • Kasapoğlu, A. ve Turan, F. (2008). Attitude-behaviour relationships in environmental education: A case study from Turkey”. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 65(2), 219–231.
  • Kılınç, A. (2010). Can project-based learning close the gap? Turkish student teachers and proenviromental behaviours. International Journal of Enviromental ve Science Education, 5(4), 495-509.
  • Kılınç, A., Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (2011). Turkish school students and globalwarming: Beliefs and willingness to act. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science ve Technology Education, 7(2), 121-134.
  • Kılınç, A., Watt, H., & Richardson, P. (2012). Factors influencing teaching choice (Fit-choice) in Turkey. Asia-Pasific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 199-126.
  • Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.
  • Moore, C. F. (2003). Silent scourge: Children, pollution, and why scientists disagree. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
  • Naess, A. (1995). The deep ecological movement. Deep ecology for the 21st century. Boston: Shambhala Publications. Negev, M., Sagy, G., Tal, A., Salzberg A., & Garb, Y. (2006). Mapping environmental literacy in Israel. 35th Annual NAAEE Conference: Building Environmental Education in Society, St. Paul, MN, The USA.
  • Newhouse, N. (1991). Implications of attitude and behavior research for environmental conservation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 26–32.
  • Nisbet, E. K. L., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41, 715-740.
  • Olivos, P., & Aragonés, J.I. (2011). Psychometric properties of the environmental identity scale. Psyecology, 2(1), 65-74.
  • Önal, N. ve Çakır, H. (2015). Eğitim fakültesi öğretim elemanlarının teknolojik pedagojik içerik bilgilerine ilişkin özgüven algıları. Hasan Ali Yücel Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12-2(24), 117-131.
  • Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
  • Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391-406.
  • Schultz, P. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: Understanding human–nature interactions. P. Schmuck ve P. W. Schultz (Ed.), The psychology of sustainable development içinde (ss. 61–78). New York: Kluwer.
  • Schultz, W., & Tabanico, J. (2007). Self, identity, and the natural environment: Exploring implicit connections with nature. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(6), 1219-1247.
  • Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309-317.
  • Şama, E. (2003). Öğretmen adaylarının çevre sorunlarına yönelik tutumları. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 99-110.
  • Şeker, H., Deniz, S. ve Görgen, G. (2004). Ögretmen yeterlikleri ölçeği. Milli Eğitim Dergisi. 164, 105-118.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Teksöz, G., Şahin, E. ve Ertepınar, H. (2010). Çevre okuryazarlığı, öğretmen adayları ve sürdürülebilir bir gelecek. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39, 307-320.
  • Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2006). Atık Bertaraf ve Geri Kazanım Tesisleri İstatistikleri (2005). Web adresi: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=415. (Erişim tarihi: 05.07. 2011).
  • Yencken, D. (2000). Young people and the environment: The implications for environmentalism. D.Yencken, J.Fien, ve H. Sykes (Ed.), Environment, education and society in the Asia-Pacific içinde (ss. 212-250). London: Routledge.
  • Yılmaz, A., Morgil, İ., Aktuğ, P. ve Göbekli, İ. (2002). Ortaöğretim ve üniversite öğrencilerinin çevre, çevre kavramları ve sorunları konusundaki bilgileri ve öneriler. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22, 156–162.
There are 42 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Nagihan Tanık Önal 0000-0002-5926-521X

Ahmet Kılınç 0000-0003-1906-8454

Sibel Saraçoğlu 0000-0001-9023-7383

Publication Date December 7, 2020
Submission Date December 18, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 33 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Tanık Önal, N., Kılınç, A., & Saraçoğlu, S. (2020). FEN BİLGİSİ ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ ÇEVRE KİMLİKLERİNİN VE ÇEVRE DOSTU DAVRANIŞLARININ İNCELENMESİ. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(3), 749-777. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.660668