Analyzing a Human and Environment Unit at the 5th Grade Science Curriculum within the Environmentally Lliterate Citizenship Context

Öz

All the countries have an effort in cultivating environmentally literate citizens since the governments and citizens are responsible to protect the environment. Turkey is one of these countries which integrated environmental education topics and objectives into the science curriculum. Different frameworks have been developed to assess individuals' views about, attitudes and behaviors towards the environment and address environmental issues. These frameworks mostly focus on environmental literacy but they do not emphasize environmental citizenship. Assessment of the curriculum through the lens of a framework that grounds on both environmental literacy and citizenship is important and needed in order to cultivate environmentally literate citizens. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the extent to which the newly developed science curriculum provided the opportunity to constitute environmental literate citizenship at the 5th grade level. We benefited a coherent framework grounded by environmental literacy and environmental citizenship in our inquiry to analyze the curriculum. Included among the data collection sources were curriculum documents, objectives, and learning and assessment activities at the 5th grade level. The data analysis consisted of two steps; (i) analysis of the objectives and (ii) content analysis of the human and environment unit at the 5th grade science textbook within the context of environmental literate citizenship. Our findings indicated that the objectives under environmental citizenship required social action and these objectives were associated with critical environmental literacy. In conclusion, the content had the potentiality to help students develop critical viewpoints about environmental issues from critical environmental literacy and justice-oriented citizenship aspects and take social action to make a change in their environment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• science currriculum
• environmental literacy
• citizenship

Analyzing a Human and Environment Unit at the 5th Grade Science Curriculum within the Environmentally Lliterate Citizenship Context

Abstract

All the countries have an effort in cultivating environmentally literate citizens since the governments and citizens are responsible to protect the environment. Turkey is one of these countries which integrated environmental education topics and objectives into the science curriculum. Different frameworks have been developed to assess individuals' views about, attitudes and behaviors towards the environment and address environmental issues. These frameworks mostly focus on environmental literacy, but they do not emphasize environmental citizenship. Assessment of the curriculum through the lens of a framework that grounds on both environmental literacy and citizenship is important and needed in order to cultivate environmentally literate citizens. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the extent to which the newly developed science curriculum provided the opportunity to constitute environmental literate citizenship at the 5th grade level. We benefited a coherent framework grounded by environmental literacy and environmental citizenship in our inquiry to analyze the curriculum. Included among the data collection sources were curriculum documents, objectives, and learning and assessment activities at the 5th grade level. The data analysis consisted of two steps: (i) analysis of the objectives and (ii) content analysis of the human and environment unit at the 5th grade science textbook within the context of environmental literate citizenship. Our findings indicated that the objectives under environmental citizenship required social action and these objectives were associated with critical environmental literacy. In conclusion, the content had the potentiality to help students develop critical viewpoints about environmental issues from critical environmental literacy and justice-oriented citizenship aspects and take social action to make a change in their environment.

Keywords

• Science Curriculum
• Science Curriculum
• Science Textbook
• Content Analysis
• Environmental Literacy
• Environmental Citizenship

Kaynakça

1. Acuna, V. (2015). Environmental citizenship in Chilean school textbooks: A case study on environmental citizenship education in Chilean basic-education textbooks of 2012. [Unpublished master's thesis]. The University of British Columbia.
2. Aikenhead, G.S. (1992). The integration of STS into science education. Theory into Practice, 31, 27-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543521
3. Barraza, L. (2001). Environmental education in Mexican schools: The primary level. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960109599143
4. Berkowitz, A. J., Ford, M. A., & Brewer, C. A. (2005). A framework for integrating ecological literacy, civics literacy, and environmental citizenship in environmental education. In E. A. Johnson & M. J. Mapping (Eds.), Environmental education and advocacy: Changing perspectives of ecology and education (pp. 227–266). Cambridge University Press.
5. Carvalho, G. S., Tracana, R. B., Skujiene, G. & Turcinaviciene, J. (2011). Trends in environmental education images of textbooks from western and eastern European countries and non-European countries. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2587-2610. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.556831
6. Cermak, M. J. (2012). Hip-hop, social justice, and environmental education: Toward a critical ecological literacy. Journal of Environmental Education, 43(3), 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2011.633579
7. Chawla, L., & Cushing, D. F. (2007). Education for strategic environmental behavior. Environmental Education Research, 13, 437–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701581539
8. Cheng, I. N. Y. & So, W. W. M. (2015). Teachers’ environmental literacy and teaching stories of three Hong Kong primary school teachers. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 24(1), 58-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2014.967111

9. Cotton, D. R. E. (2006). Implementing curriculum guidance on environmental education: The importance of teachers' beliefs. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 67-83.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500038644
10. Craig, C. A., & Allen, M. W. (2015). The impact of curriculum-based learning on environmental literacy and energy consumption with implications for policy. Utilities Policy, 35, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2015.06.011
11. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
13. Dimick, A.S. (2015). Supporting youth to develop environmental citizenship within/against a neoliberal context. Environmental Education Research, 21(3), 390-402. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2014.994164
14. Dobson, A. (2007). Environmental citizenship: Towards sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 15(5), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.344
15. Ellis, R., & Waterton, C. (2004). Environmental citizenship in the making: The participation of volunteer naturalists in UK biological recording and biodiversity policy. Science and Public Policy, 31, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154304781780055
16. Erdogan, M., Kostova, Z., & Marcinkowski, T. (2009). Components of environmental literacy in the elementary education curriculum in Bulgaria and Turkey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(1), 15-26.https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75253
17. European Network for Environmental Citizenship (2018a). Defining “Environmental Citizenship”. http://enec-cost.eu/our-approach/enec-environmental-citizenship/
18. Gillian, K., & Niranjan, C. (2019). Developing teachers’ environmental literacy through inquiry-based practices. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(6), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/103065
19. Goldman, D., Hansmann, R., Činčera, R., Radović, V., Telešienė, A., Balžekienė, A., Vávra, J. (2020). Education for environmental citizenship and responsible environmental behaviour. In A. C. Hadjichambis, P. Reis, D. Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, J. Činčera, J. Boeve-de Pauw, N. Gericke, M. C. Knippels (Eds.), Conceptualizing environmental citizenship for 21st century education (pp. 115-138). Springer Open.
20. Green, C., Medina-Jerez, W., & Bryant, C. (2016). Cultivating environmental citizenship in teacher education. Teaching Education, 27(2), 117-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2015.1043121
21. Hart, P. (2002). The environment in the science curriculum: The politics of change in the Pan-Canadian science curriculum development process. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1239-1254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210137728
22. Hollweg, K. S., Taylor, J. R., Bybee, R. W., Marcinkowski, T. J., McBeth, W. C., & Zoido, P. (2011). Developing a framework for assessing environmental literacy. North American Association for Environmental Education. http://www.naaee.net.
23. Horwitz, W. A. (1996). Developmental origins of environmental ethics: The life experiences of activists. Ethics and Behavior, 6(1), 29-54. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb0601_3
24. Innes, S., Skeaff, S., Shephard, K., Furnari, M., Harraway, J., Jowett, T., Lovelock, B., & Strack, M. (2018). Greening the curriculum to foster environmental literacy in tertiary students studying human nutrition. Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition, 13(2), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/19320248.2016.1255693
25. The Islamic Foundation for Ecology and Environmental Sciences (2015). Islamic Declaration on Global Climate Change. http://www.ifees.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2016/10/climate_declarationmMWB.pdf
26. Kim, K-O. (2003). An inventory for assessing environmental education curricula. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(2), 12-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960309603495
27. Klakayan, J., & Singseewo, A. (2016). The development of a curriculum for renewable energy: A case study of charcoal briquettes from agricultural residues for environmental literacy of secondary school students at Samaki Whittaya municipality school. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(2), 121–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n2p121
28. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
29. Lee, J. Chi-Kin. (2000). Teacher receptivity to curriculum change in the implementation stage: The case of environmental education in Hong Kong. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(1), 95-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202700182871
30. McBeth, W., & Volk, T. L. (2009). The national environmental literacy project: A baseline study of middle-grade students in the United States. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960903210031
31. Ministry of Education. (2005). Middle school science curriculum. MoNE.
32. Ministry of Education. (2013). Primary and middle school science curriculum. MoNE.
33. Ministry of Environment and Forestry. (2004). Environmental Atlas of Turkey. http://ahmetsaltik.net/arsiv/2012/06/Turkiye_Cevre_Atlasi_Cevre_Bakanligi.pdf
34. Ministry of Environment and Urbanization. (2011). State of the environment report for the Republic of Turkey. http://www.csb.gov.tr/turkce/dosya/ced/TCDR_2011.pdf
35. Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (2011). The Republic of Turkey: Climate change action plan (2011-2023). http://www.dsi.gov.tr/docs/iklim-degisikligi/%C4%B1depeng.pdf?sfvrsn=2
36. NAEE (2015). The environmental curriculum: Opportunities for environmental education across the national curriculum for England. http://naee.org.uk/curriculum-resources/
37. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/4962.
38. National Research Council. (2013). Next-generation science standards for states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290.
39. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2003). NSTA position statement: Environmental education. NSTA. http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/environmental.aspx
40. Negev, M., Sagy, G., Garb, Y., Salzberg, A., & Tal, A. (2008). Evaluating the environmental literacy of Israeli elementary and high school students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.39.2.3-20
41. Organization for Economic and Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematics, and financial literacy. PISA, OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2015-assessment-and-analytical-framework_9789264255425-en
42. Ross, H. (2007). The environment in the curriculum: representation and development in the Scottish physical and social sciences. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(6), 659-677. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270701570304
43. Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution, and directions in the 1990s. ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
44. Schild, R. (2016). Environmental citizenship: What can political theory contribute to environmental education practice? The Journal of Environmental Education, 47(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1092417
45. Short, P. C. (2010). Responsible environmental action: Its role and status in environmental education and environmental quality. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(1), 7-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960903206781
46. Salmon, J. (2000). Are we building environmental literacy? The Journal of Environmental Education, 31(4), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960009598645
47. Smederevac-Lalic, M., Finger, D., Kovách, I., Lenhardt, M., Petrovic, J., Djikanovic, V., Conti, D., & Boeve-de Pauw, J. (2020). Knowledge and environmental citizenship. In A.C. Hadjichambis, P. Reis, D. Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, J. Činčera, J. Boeve-de Pauw, N. Gericke, M.C. Knippels (Eds.), Conceptualizing environmental citizenship for 21st century education (pp. 69-82). Springer Open.
48. Srbinovski, M. (2013). Environmental education in Macedonian schools: A comparative analysis of textbooks. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 12(3), 163-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/1533015X.2013.838867 Srbinovski, M., Erdogan, M., & Ismaili, M. (2010). Environmental literacy in the science education curriculum in Macedonia and Turkey. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 4528–4532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.725
49. Sontay, G., Gokdere, M., & Usta, E. (2015). A comparative investigation of sub-components of environmental literacy at the secondary school level. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 12(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10130a
50. Stables, A. (1998). Environmental literacy: Functional, cultural, and critical. The case of the SCAA guidelines. Environmental Education, 4, 155-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462980040203
51. Stevenson, R.B. (2007). Schooling and environmental education: Contradictions in purpose and practice. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 139-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701295726
52. Turan, E., & Bayrakdar, E. (2020). Türkiye’nin su yönetim politikaları: Ulusal güvenlik açısından bir değerlendirme. Uluslararası Politik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.25272/j.2149-8539.2020.6.2.01
53. The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey. (2004). National science and technology policies: 2003-2023-strategy document. https://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files//vizyon2023/Vizyon2023_Stratej i_Belgesi.pdf
54. UNESCO (1989). Environmental literacy for all. Connect, 14(2), 1.
55. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)/ United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (1976). The Belgrade Charter. Connect: UNESCO/UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter, 1(1), 1-2.
56. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)/ United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (1978). The Tbilisi declaration. Connect, 3(1), 1-8.
57. United Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change (2016). The Paris agreement. https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/10a01.pdf
58. Venville, G., Rennie, L. J., & Wallace, J. (2009). Disciplinary versus integrated curriculum: The challenge for school science. The New Critic, 10, 1-9.
59. Walker, K.E. (1995). The teaching and learning of environmental education in NSW primary schools: A case study. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 11, 121-129. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0814062600003013
60. Weber, M. (1978). The nature of social action. In W. Runciman (Ed.) & E. Matthews (Trans.), Max Weber: Selections in translation (pp. 7-32). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810831.005
61. Westheimer, J., & Kahn, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 24(20), 237–269. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002237
62. Yucel-Ozata, E., & Ozkan, M. (2014). A comparative study of the subjects on the ecosystem, biological diversity, and environmental problems in the Turkish science curriculum with the international curricula. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 11(4), 31-46. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10125a