4.2 Article

Linking environmental knowledge, attitude, and behavior with place: a case study for strategic environmental education planning in Saint Lucia

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 7, 页码 929-950

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2022.2074376

关键词

Environmental education; place; knowledge-attitude-behavior (KAB) model; student; Saint Lucia; GIS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This case study examined the impact of urban/rural differences on the environmental knowledge, attitude, and action levels of youth. The results showed significant differences between urban and rural areas, as well as interactions between location and age, and location and sex. Path analysis confirmed that location had a direct impact on students' knowledge, and indirect impacts on attitude and action levels through age. The study highlights the importance of considering place in environmental education design.
This case study investigated whether and how urban/rural differences may impact environmental knowledge, attitude, and action levels of the youth to better understand the linkage between place and environmental behavior. A nation-wide survey was conducted in Saint Lucia, targeting secondary school students. A total of 1,349 self-reported questionnaire samples were collected and the results were compared between sex (male/female), age (younger/older), and location (urban/rural) groups using three-way ANOVA tests. Significant urban-rural differences as well as interactions between location and age, and location and sex factors, were found. A path analysis further confirmed that location had a significant direct impact on students' knowledge, and indirect impacts on attitude and action levels via age factor. We discuss the impact of living place on students' environmental characteristics, and how environmental education (EE) can incorporate such perspective in its design. We believe that the obtained insights are useful for making EE more effective.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据