Assessing the Understanding and Practices of 3R’s
among the Secondary School Students
Abdul Mutalib Embong, Hezlina Mohd Hashim,
Azelin Mohamed Noor, Raja Ahmad Iskandar Raja
Yaacob and Lee Kian Seng
Department of Management and Humanities, Department of
Mechanical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS
Bandar Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia
mutalib_embong@petronas.com.my
Abstract— Indulging the values towards sustainable environment
has become the main priority in the National Philosophy of
Education and being incorporated into the Malaysia Education
Curriculum. Students are taught to appreciate the earth and its
natural sources at a young age through various activities. A study
was taken place to gauge the environmental education pertaining
the understanding and practices of 3R’s among secondary school
students from five states in Malaysia. Data was collected from
468 students ranging from 13 to 19 years old using a survey
questionnaire. It involved the major races in Malaysia from both
genders. The results showed that students have a good
understanding on 3R’s with the most understanding on the
Recycle followed by Reuse and Reduce. Urban students
understood Reuse the most as compared to rural students who
understood Recycle the most. They were also aware of the
benefits gained from 3R’s. In terms of sustainable behavior,
students from both areas practiced the 3R’s weekly and monthly.
Some main statements regarding the practice of 3R’s were
obtained from students. The results also showed that schools
were the main source to 3R’s followed by electronic and printed
media.
Keywords- 3R’s, understand, practice, reuse, reduce , recycle
I. INTRODUCTION
The quality of environment is a great concern to everyone.
Thus, understanding the importance of the environment is very
important and becomes one of the main agenda in the National
Philosophy of Education and being incorporated into the
Malaysia Education Curriculum, as the government’s policy is
not successful without the public’s support [1]. As education
on the environment among young children is vital to encourage
the spread of environmental messages to their parents [2]; it
signifies children’s important role in saving the environment.
Hence, this study focuses on accessing the understanding
and practice of 3R’s among the secondary school students.
978-1-4799-2803-3/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE
Norasyikin Abdul Malik
English Department, Academy of Language Studies
Universiti Teknologi MARA (Perak)
32610 Bandar Baru Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia
II. BACKGROUND
Excessive solid waste production has filled up most
landfills around the world and this has led to a severe crisis in
waste management. Through a survey conducted by [3], a
massive 89% agreed that recycling is a means to dispose waste.
However, only 34% of the same respondents recycled waste.
This could indicate that although respondents had showed a
high level of awareness, their action was not in line with their
belief. In a more recent survey, [4] found 80% of the
respondents felt they should recycle and 60% avoided buying
items with too much wrapping or packaging. This could
indicate that there is an increase of the action in waste
management in recent years. Since [5] had identified students
as the ones who experience social change or significant
alternation over a period of time through behavior patterns and
cultural values and norms, students have become the focus of
the researchers of this study.
It was found that schools, especially in the urban areas of
Malaysia, had practiced recycling through extracurricular
activities [6]. A local tabloid, the Star (2010) had reported that
a recycling campaign organized by a district city council, an
environmental management company and a soft drink
manufacturing company had received positive feedback from
15 primary schools and 17 secondary schools [7]. This could
be interpreted as a positive attitude towards environmental
sustainability and waste management by schools. This signifies
positive attitude towards environment sustainability and in
rising awareness on waste management in Malaysia.
Reference [8] implemented a method in nurturing “Reduce,
Reuse and Recycle message” to primary school children at
England. It involved 6705 primary school children in 39
schools. The project aimed to increase the students’ knowledge
and understanding on a better waste management. The
approach used was “Schools Waste Action Club” (SWAC), a
waste basic programme structure. Among the waste items
involved in the 3R’s were newspapers, papers, boxes and other
paper products, plastic bottles or containers, glass bottles or
other glass items, aluminium cans or tins. The students were
exposed on environmental knowledge and conducted relevant
activities in the class and also within a wider community. The
findings showed an increase of children’s environmental
knowledge, participation in recycling and recycling tonnages as
well as a decline of waste in that area.
Reference [6] also investigated on factors affecting
secondary school students’ involvement in recycling activities.
A survey was done on 411 secondary school students from 10
urban schools in Selangor, Malaysia. The data were analysed
and the Principal Component method of extraction was used
during the analysis. It was found that social influences within
the school, familiarity with logistics, perception of waste,
perceived involvement with others and benefits gained from
participating affected these students’ involvement.
The main source of knowledge on the environment was
mass media while the school was the least contributing source
[9]. Data was collected from 163 students aged 11 years old
from two schools at a district of Hulu Langat, Selangor,
Malaysia. Findings showed that the respondents were familiar
with recycling prerequisite but unfortunately did not practice it.
The studies mentioned earlier had focused on the
implementation of recycling programme done at school,
influencing factors and main sources of environmental
knowledge among school students. However, the real concern
is whether the students understand the importance of the
environmental knowledge and practice it.
Mass media has played a major role in shaping perceptions
and awareness in environmental issues since the 1960s [10]
[11]. Government officials, environmental activists, scientists,
industrialists, journalists and broadcasters have set the agenda
for environmental discourse and decision-making for years.
The publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in 1962 for
example, had changed the typical environmental discourse
among scientists, activists, and government officials.
Television, as a national and international medium had greatly
increased the visibility of environmental issues [12]. As the
advancement of technology is rapidly expanding, the internet is
accessible at almost every house and to a certain extent, it
contributes to positive attitudes towards the environment
conservation [13]. These conservation behaviours can be seen
not only among the society but among children as well.
With some gaps in the body of knowledge from various
research and exercise, the researchers of this study were of the
opinion to conduct an investigation specifically on secondary
school students. More precisely, this study will determine to
what extent are secondary school students knowledge on
reduce, reuse and recycle or the 3R’s and to list their practices
of the 3R’s.
This paper analyses the understanding and practices of 3R’s
among secondary school students. The emphases on students is
vital as they are the ones who experience the social change in
behavior effectively in any [5]. Students have been exposed to
sustainable activities while in school or within the community.
Researches conducted have shown evidence of sustainable
practices among students. And these practices have evolved
over time. From such practices too, [14] revealed how certain
norms are culturally and socially sustained and transferred.
III. METHODOLOGY
The research design of this study utilized the survey
method. Secondary school students between the age of 13 and
19 years old were the focus of the study because this cohort has
undergone formal environmental education during the primary
and secondary level. Upon receiving approval from the
Ministry of Education, data were collected between February
to April 2013. Sixteen schools around Peninsular Malaysia and
three schools from Sarawak, representing West Malaysia, were
randomly selected for this study. The states in Peninsular
Malaysia were Terengganu, representing East Peninsular;
Perak north Peninsular; Kuala Lumpur, central Peninsula and
Johor, south Peninsula. Four schools were selected from each
state. The locations of the schools were varied: urban, sub–
urban, village and rural areas. The types of school were varied
too from boarding schools to daily schools. Altogether, this
study involved the feedback from a total of 468 students or
respondents.
IV. THE INSTRUMENTS
The instrument of the survey consisted of three sections:
demographic variables, understanding of 3R’s and practices of
3R’s. The understanding section contained three parts :
Reduce (5 questions), Reduce (5 questions) and Recycle ( 7
questions), with a 3 point scale ranging from yes, no and
uncertain for certain questions. This scale is based on [15] and
[16] which revealed the scale as one of the most suitable scales
in assessing children towards certain issue and topic. Practices
on 3R’s were assessed through three parts: Reduce (2
statements), Reuse (2 statements) and Recycle (3 statements).
Respondents were allowed to choose more than one statement.
A pilot study was carried out to determine the validity and
reliability of the instrument used.
In the first section of the questionnaire, questions sought to
elicit the demographic background of respondents. The
personal information requested included age, gender, race and
study information such as the education level of the
respondents. Additional information such as urban-rural status
and state of the respondents were also elicited.
The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS
version 19.0) was used as computer software to analyse the
collected data. The levels of understanding and practices were
described by using the frequency statistical approach. A
categorical composite score was conducted to assess the level
of understanding and practices of 3R’s among the secondary
school students. In other words, the analysis of frequency was
employed to measure the percentage among groups to represent A. Understanding of 3R’s
any differences in their understanding of reduce, reuse and
recycle. TABLE II. UNDERSTANDING OF 3R’S
Understanding
Activity
Yes No Uncertain
V. RESEARH QUESTIONS Reduce 349 (74.57 %) 33(7.05 %) 86(18.37 %)
This paper will discuss the level of understanding and Reuse 420(89.74 %) 11(2.35%) 37(7.90 %)
practices of 3R’s among the secondary school students in
Recycle 434(92.73 %) 11(2.35 %) 23(4.91 %)
Malaysia.
It is hoped that the paper will achieve the following
research questions: Most of the students met have an understanding on 3R’s. A
· What do students understand from the 3R’s phrase? total of 434 (92.73%) students knew what Recycle was
· What are the differences of students’ understanding compared to 420 (89.74%) who knew Reuse and 349
among the 3R’s activities? (74.57%) who knew Reduce. A percentage of 8.37 students
· Are there any differences in the understanding towards were uncertain what was Reduce compared to Reuse (7.9%)
3R’s between the rural and urban students? and Recycle (4.91%). It can be assumed that students were
· What are the practices among the students towards 3R’s? most familiar to Recycle compared to Reuse and Reduce. The
· How frequently do students practice 3R’s? same pattern was found in the study by [6] regarding the 3R’s
· What is the main source of information towards 3R’s? activities. He claimed that students basically had great
understanding on Recycling activity conducted at school. As a
whole, the full understanding of students echoed with the
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION report by [3]; most respondents showed high level of
awareness with 3R’s.
TABLE I. DEMOGRAPHY
TABLE III. UNDERSTANDING OF THE 3R’S ACCORDING TO AREA
Gender
Male Female Understanding
175 (37.39%) 293 (62.61%) Area Activity Yes No Uncertain
Age
Reduce 128(71.91%) 18(10.11%) 32(17.98%)
13 years 14 years 15 years 16 years
URBAN
38 (8.12%) 69 (14.74%) 143 (30.56%) 110 (23.50%)
(178
17 years 18 years 19 years
samplings) Reuse 163(91.57%) 5(2.81%) 10(5.62%)
52 (11.11%) 0a (0%) 55 (11.75%)
Race Recycle 160(89.89%) 7(3.93%) 11(6.18%)
Malay Chinese Indian Bumiputera Others
261 109 Reduce 221(76.21%) 15(5.17%) 54(18.62%)
58 (12.39%) 33 (7.05%) 7 (1.49%) RURAL
(55.77%) (23.29%)
Area (290
Urban Rural samplings) Reuse 257(88.62%) 6(2.07%) 27(9.31%)
178 (38.03%) 290 (61.97%)
Recycle 274(94.48%) 4(1.38%) 12(4.14%)
State
Terengganu Sarawak Selangor Johor Perak
106
94 (20.08%) 83 (17.74%) 93 (19.87%) 92 (19.66%) Between the urban and rural area students, the data showed
(22.65%)
a. There were no 18 year old students because the survey was done in early of the year and the intake of that rural students understood Recycle the most at 94.48% as
lower six (18 year old students) began in May
compared to 89.89% of urban students who understood
Recycle the most. A percentage of 91.57 urban students
understood Reuse more as compared to 88.62% of rural
Collectively, 550 questionnaires were randomly distributed
students who understood the same concept. Both urban and
for this study and 468 students responded. Among those who
rural students had the lowest understanding on Reduce which
responded, 175 were males and 293 were females. The ranges
was about 70%. The same result was obtained from both
of age were: 13 years (8.12%), 14 years (14.74 %), 15 years
areas when it came to the understanding of Reduce. Almost
(30.56 %), 16 years (23.50%), 17 years (11.11%) and 19 years
18% of both the urban and rural students did not understand
(11.75%). In terms of race, Malays dominated with 55.77 %,
the meaning of Reduce.
followed by Chineses (23.29%), Indians (12.39%),
Bumiputeras or the natives (7.95%) and others (1.49%). The
study took place in five different areas in Malaysia which
were Terengganu (20.08% of students), Sarawak (17.74%),
Selangor (19.87%), Johor (19.66%) and Perak (22.65%).
 TABLE IV. WHY DO YOU REDUCE ? due to social influences. These two are the significant
No. of influencing factors among the respondents who Recycle.
Reasons
Respondents
I am aware that the resources are depleting. 337
The amount of waste is polluting the mother earth. 252
It is healthier and more hygienic. 194
It saves money 83
It is my culture 28
Others 0

Three separate questions (each on Reduce, Reuse and

Recycle) were asked on possible reasons which may lead to
3R’s. The results shown in Table IV suggest that the highest
reasons for the students to Reduce were because they were
aware that the resources are depleting with a total of 337
students choosing that reason comparing to 252 students who
chose the amount of waste is polluting mother earth to
Reduce. The third popular reason to Reduce (194 students)
was it is healthier and more hygienic. Figure 1. Sources of Information to 3R’s

TABLE V. WHY DO YOU REUSE ?

Most of the students stated that they obtained the
Reasons
No. of information on 3R’s when they were in primary and secondary
Respondents schools. This finding is similar with the finding obtained by
I am aware that the resources are depleting. 280 [5] who found that students were exposed to sustainable
The amount of waste is polluting the mother earth. 217
activities while in schools or colleges. Reference [9] explained
It saves money. 217
It is my culture 71 that the environmental education subject was incorporated in
It is interesting 127 Malaysian schools since 1986 which means students are
I don’t “reuse” much 10 familiar with 3R’s. Practically, the 3R’s activity is also being
conducted at schools. The “Reduce, Reuse and Recycle
message” project by [8] showed an increase of children’s
Table V shows that 280 students chose that they are aware
environmental knowledge when the project was conducted in
that the resources are depleting as their main reason to Reuse
schools. Printed media and electronic media had played an
as compared to 217 students who chose the amount of waste is
important role in becoming the main source of information on
polluting the mother earth as their reason. Apart from that,
3R’s for these students. The considerable use of the internet
217 students chose to Reuse because it saves money.
for example, has brought new dimensions towards the
environmental knowledge among school children [13]. It can
TABLE VI. WHY WOULD YOU RECYCLE?
be considered that the media is able to cultivate awareness
Reasons
No. of towards sustainable environment among students.
Respondents
I am aware that the resources are depleting. 201
The amount of waste is polluting the mother earth. 276
It is my culture 85 B. Practices of 3R’s
It earns me money. 90
I don’t “recycle” much 12 TABLE VII. THE FREQUENCY OF 3R’S
Others 19
Activities
Frequency Reduce Reuse Recycle
Being aware that the resources are depleting was the Daily 91(19.44%) 84(17.95%) 71(15.17%)
highest reason to Reduce and Reuse among the respondents,
Weekly 163(34.82%) 150(32.61%) 148(31.62%)
the amount of waste is polluting the earth is the ultimate
reason chosen by the students to Recycle. A total of 276 Monthly 126(26.92%) 139(29.70%) 153(32.69%)
students chose the said reason while the second highest reason Annually 40(8.54%) 52(11.11%) 58(12.39%)
(201 students) to Recycle is they are aware that the resources Once in a few
years 33(7.05%) 32(6.84%) 28(5.98%)
are depleting. This finding is similar to the result obtained by
[6] which reported that students participate in Recycling Never 13(2.78%) 11(2.35%) 10(2.17%)
activity because they are aware of the benefits gained and also
 A majority of the students practiced the 3R’s weekly and No. of
Ways
monthly. Refer to Table VII. In a week, an equal percentage of Respondents
students are practicing Reduce (34.82%), Reuse (32.61%) and appliances, clothing and furniture so that it won’t be
Recycle (31.62%). At the same time, there are those who thrown and replaced as frequently.
Borrow, rent or share things 138
practiced it monthly. A percentage of 26.92% Reduced, Donate used items 118
29.70% Reused and 32.69% Recycled. On the other hand, Reduce wasted food by composing 76
2.78% of the students did not Reduce, 2.35% did not Reuse Feed stray dogs and cats with the leftover food 106
and 2.17% did not Recycle daily.
Three popular methods on reducing the use of resources
were: (i) buy products with less packaging that use less raw
TABLE VIII. THE FREQUENCY OF 3R’S ACCORDING TO AREAS materials, eg. Buy products in bulk or more content to save the
Activities packaging materials (208 students) (ii) purchase used
Area Frequency
Reduce Reuse Recycle products (190 students) and (iii) choose reusable over
Daily 38(21.35%) 31(17.42%) 26(14.61%) disposable items, eg. Use own metallic or plastic containers
Urban (178 samplings )

Weekly 54(30.34%) 54(30.34%) 52(29.21%)

instead of disposable polystyrene containers or plastic bags
(177 students). These same methods were also suggested by
Monthly 51(28.65%) 62(34.83%) 59(33.15%)
[16].
Annually 16(8.99%) 18(10.11%) 23(12.92%)
Once in a few
years 13(7.30%) 9(5.06%) 12(6.74%) TABLE X. HOW DO YOU REUSE YOUR ITEMS?
Never 6(3.37%) 4(2.25%) 6(3.37%)
No. of
Ways
Daily 56(19.31%) 53(18.28%) 45(15.57%) Respondents
Rural (290 samplings)

Use a purchased item as long as possible as long as it

Weekly 108(37.24%) 96(33.10%) 96(33.10%)
serves it purpose, regarding how old it may look. 300
Monthly 75(25.86%) 77(26.55%) 94(32.41%) Turn bottles or containers into pots for gardening. 250
Use printed papers to record or jot down ideas. 186
Annually 24(8.28%) 34(11.72%) 35(12.07%)
Use newspapers to wrap food 144
Once in a few
Use tyres to plant plants 117
years 20(6.90%) 23(7.93%) 15(5.17%)
Others 6
Never 7(2.41%) 7(2.41%) 5(1.72%) I don’t “reuse” 9

From Table X, 300 students chose Use a purchased item as

Both rural and urban students preferred to practice the 3R’s long as possible as long as it serves it purpose, to Reuse their
weekly and monthly. As shown in Table VIII, 30.35% of the items as compared to 250 students who Turn bottles or
urban students practiced Reduce weekly while 37.24% of the containers into pots for gardening and 186 who Use printed
rural students practiced the same. Almost the same figure of papers to record or jot down ideas. Other popular answers
30% of urban students practiced Reuse and Recycle weekly, were to use newspapers (with a layer of plastic) to wrap food.,
as compared to more than 33% of the rural students who Sew small pieces of clothes into a blanket or cloth wipe and
practiced both the Reuse and Recycle over the same period. Use tires to plant plants.
There was almost the same distribution in terms of percentage
for all the 3R’s practices for both rural and urban students.
About 20% of the students from both areas practiced 3R’s TABLE XI. WHAT DO YOU RECYCLE?
daily. Less than 4 % of the students from both areas did not No. of
Items
practice all of the 3R’s stated. Respondents
Newspapers, papers, boxes and other paper products. 345
Plastic bottles or containers. 295
TABLE IX. HOW DO YOU REDUCE THE USE OF RESOURCES? Glass bottles or other glass items. 175
Aluminum cans or tins. 203
No. of
Ways Metals 75
Respondents
Electronic gadget 47
Purchase used products. 190 Others 6
Buy products with less packaging that use less raw
I don’t “recycle” 17
materials, eg. Buy products in bulk or more content
to save the packaging materials. 208
Choose reusable over disposable items, eg. Use own Newspapers, papers, boxes and other paper products
metallic or plastic containers instead of disposable were among the things students recycled most (345) followed
polystyrene containers or plastic bags. 177
by plastic bottles or containers (295), glass bottles or other
Maintain and repair products like electronic 122
glass items (175) and aluminum cans or tins (203). The
recycling of these items are very popular items for recycling.
Reference [8] stated that students were exposed to the
recycling of the items around them and it served as an
excellent way of saving energy and conserving the
environment. Newspapers and papers were commonly found
in students’ daily activity.
TABLE XII. HOW DO YOU RECYCLE YOUR WASTE?
No. of
Ways
Respondents
Send to drop-off center. 208
Put into recycling bins. 270
Sell to recycling trucks. 263
Sell to factories. 84
Others 15
I don't recycle. 31
The most popular method stated by 270 students, for waste
recycling, was to send the recyclables to drop-off centers.
Meanwhile, a total of 270 students made use of the recycling
bins and 263 students sold to recycling trucks. In this respect,
the findings from this current survey are very similar to those
obtained from the Schools Waste Action Club (SWAC) as in
[8]. The SWAC is a waste basic programme structure which
amongst others increase children’s environmental knowledge
by getting them involved in recycling and recycling tonnages.
VII. CONCLUSION
The findings from this study gave some positive ideas that
secondary school students have a good understanding and do
practice 3R’s. The students did understand Recycle the most
but there was a difference when a comparison between the
urban and rural school students was made. In terms of
practice, most of the students performed the 3R’s on a weekly
and monthly basis. As such, educators should deliberate on
ways to encourage daily 3R’s activities among the students. A
majority of the students had agreed that the sources of
environmental knowledge were their schools and the media. In
line with the technological and communication advancements,
these sources can play a more significant role in creating
awareness and in encouraging students to live towards a better
sustainable environment. Students are considered as the
younger generation who are legacies and are anticipated to be
knowledgeable and future protectors and conservationists of
the environment. Their experiences will create social change
in behavior within various communities [5]. If this is achieved,
then the earth can look forward to having the proliferation of
mankind with positive attitudes towards the environment.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the principals,
teachers and students from various schools in Malaysia for
opening their doors to them. Also, to the management and
staff of Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri
Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia for their continuous support and
encouragement.
REFERENCES
[1] National Philosophy of Education :Syllabus Document <
http://jpt.mohe.gov.my/eng/DASAR/falsafah.php.> (access 5.5.2013).
[2] Heimlich, J.E., and Ardoin, N.M. (2008) Understanding behavior to
understand behavior change: a literature review Environmental
Education Research, 14 (3) (2008), pp. 215–237
[3] Waste Watch. (1999). What people think about waste; attitudes and
awareness research into waste management and recycling. NOP
Research Group, London
[4] Defra.(2007). Survey of Public Attitudes and Behaviours toward the
Environment.<http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/pubatt/do
wnload/pubattsum2007.pdf> (access 5.5.2013).
[5] N. Kokkarinen1 and A. Cotgrave (2007) Student Attitudes Toward The
Environment, School of Built Environment, Liverpool John Moores
University, Liverpool, UK
[6] Kamaruddin, S.M. (2010) Factors that influence urban secondary
students' recycling participation in Selangor, Malaysia. International
Journal of Learning Volume 17, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 215-230
[7] The Star ( May 10, 2010 ) Beverage company teams up with council to
expand school recycling a campaign <http://www.thestar.com.my/story>
(access 25.5. 2013).
[8] Maddox, P., Doran, C., Williams, I.D., and Kus, M. (2011) The role of
intergenerational influence in waste education programmes: The THAW
project a Waste Watch, Waste Management 31, 2590–2600.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. (access 8.5.2013).
[9] Aimi MS, Nor Azura S, Fakhru’l-Razi A (2011) Impact of
Environmental Eductaion on Concern,Knowledge, and Sustainable
Behavior of primary School Chidlren
[10] Shabecoff, P. (1993) A Fierce Green Fire: The American Environmental
Movement. Hill and Wang, New York.
[11] Sachsman, D. (1976) Public Relations Influence on Coverage of
Environment in San Francisco Area. Journalism Quarterly 53: 54-60.
[12] Sachsman, D (2000) The Role of Mass Media in Shaping Perceptions
and Awareness of Environmental Issues . Climate Change
Communication Conference June 2000
[13] Baym, N., Zhang, Y.B., and Lin, M. (2002) The Internet in college
social life. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association
of Internet Researchers, Maastricht, The Netherlands, October
[14] Todorov, V; and Marinova, D. (2009) Models of Sustainability. 18th
World IMACS/MODSIM Congress; Cairns, Australia 13-17 July.
[15] Borgers, N., deLeeuw, E., and Hox, J. (2000).Children as respondents in
survey research: Cognitive development and response quality. Bulletin
de Methodologie Sociologique, 66: 60-75.
[16] Borgers, N. and Hox, J. (2001). Item nonresponse in questionnaire
research with children.Journal of Official Statistics, 17(2): 321-33