See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233091868

Confidence and Perceived Competence of Preservice Teachers to

Implement Biodiversity Education in Primary Schools—Four
comparative case studies from Eur....

Article  in  International Journal of Science Education · November 2011

DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2010.547534

CITATIONS READS

73 456

6 authors, including:

Petra Lindemann-Matthies Costas P. Constantinou

Pädagogische Hochschule Karlsruhe University of Cyprus
99 PUBLICATIONS   2,774 CITATIONS    315 PUBLICATIONS   2,660 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Chrysanthi Kadji
Frederick University
22 PUBLICATIONS   431 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Promotion of sensual experiences, perception of nature and motion in kindergartens and forest schools View project

Influence of plant species richness on stress recovery of humans View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Costas P. Constantinou on 06 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [University of Cyprus]
On: 11 June 2013, At: 06:15
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Science

Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

Confidence and Perceived Competence

of Preservice Teachers to Implement
Biodiversity Education in Primary
Schools—Four comparative case studies
from Europe
a b c
Petra Lindemann-Matthies , Costas Constantinou , Hans-
d e f
Joachim Lehnert , Ueli Nagel , George Raper & Chrysanthi
g
Kadji-Beltran
a
Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies,
University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
b
Department of Educational Sciences, University of Cyprus,
Nicosia, Cyprus
c
Learning in Science Group, Nicosia, Cyprus
d
Department of Biology, University of Education, Karlsruhe,
Germany
e
Department of Sciences and Social Sciences, Zurich University of
Teacher Education, Zurich, Switzerland
f
Institute of Education, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK
g
Nature Conservation Unit, Frederick University, Nicosia, Cyprus
Published online: 14 Apr 2011.

To cite this article: Petra Lindemann-Matthies , Costas Constantinou , Hans-Joachim Lehnert , Ueli
Nagel , George Raper & Chrysanthi Kadji-Beltran (2011): Confidence and Perceived Competence of
Preservice Teachers to Implement Biodiversity Education in Primary Schools—Four comparative case
studies from Europe, International Journal of Science Education, 33:16, 2247-2273

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.547534

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

conditions
 This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013
 International Journal of Science Education
Vol. 33, No. 16, 1 November 2011, pp. 2247–2273

RESEARCH REPORT

Confidence and Perceived Competence

of Preservice Teachers to Implement
Biodiversity Education in Primary
Schools—Four comparative case
studies from Europe
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Petra Lindemann-Matthiesa*, Costas Constantinoub,c,

Hans-Joachim Lehnertd, Ueli Nagele, George Raperf and
Chrysanthi Kadji-Beltrang
aInstituteof Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich,
Zurich, Switzerland; bDepartment of Educational Sciences, University of Cyprus, Nicosia,
Cyprus; cLearning in Science Group, Nicosia, Cyprus; dDepartment of Biology,
University of Education, Karlsruhe, Germany; eDepartment of Sciences and Social
Sciences, Zurich University of Teacher Education, Zurich, Switzerland; fInstitute of
Education, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK; gNature Conservation Unit, Frederick
University, Nicosia, Cyprus
petra.lindemann@ieu.uzh.ch
0950-0693
Original
Taylor
02011
00
Dr.
000002011
PetraLindemann-Matthies
& Article
International
10.1080/09500693.2010.547534
TSED_A_547534.sgm
andFrancis
(print)/1464-5289
Francis (online)
Journal of Science Education

This multinational research study was carried out between 2004 and 2006 in four teacher educa-
tion institutions in Cyprus, England, Switzerland, and Germany. With the help of a written ques-
tionnaire, the confidence and perceived competence of preservice primary teachers (N = 690) to
deliver biodiversity education in school were investigated. Data were triangulated with findings
from a previous stage of the overall research project. Study participants’ confidence to carry out
certain outdoor activities in school increased with the number of similar experiences they had
during their own secondary school education, and the more personal classroom experiences they
had during their teacher education. A sound knowledge of local wild organisms strongly added to
their confidence. However, preservice teachers’ perceived competence, and thus motivation to
implement biodiversity education later on in school, was related even more strongly to the extent
of preparation they had received during their teacher education. The results indicate that teacher

*Corresponding author. Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of

Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland. Email: petra.lindemann@ieu.
uzh.ch

ISSN 0950-0693 (print)/ISSN 1464-5289 (online)/11/162247–27

© 2011 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.547534
 2248 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

education programmes that focus exclusively on filling (biodiversity) knowledge gaps might fail to
raise confidence and competence in their students to carry out biodiversity education in school.
Programmes that have a higher possibility of attaining effectiveness in biodiversity education seek
to strike a balance between background knowledge development, pedagogical content knowledge,
and opportunities during teaching practice that leads to experiential gains in enacting meaningful
activity sequences and engaging students in holistic educational innovations. Within such
programmes, it would be fruitful to further explore the relationship between confidence, perceived
competence, and actual teaching performance.

Keywords: Biodiversity education; Education for sustainable development; Case studies

Introduction
Biodiversity loss is one of the world’s most pressing crises with many species declin-
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

ing to critically low levels and with significant numbers going extinct (Vié et al.,
2008). At the same time, there is a growing awareness of how biodiversity supports
human livelihoods (Balmford & Bond, 2005; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
[MEA], 2005). Governments and civil society have responded to this challenge by
setting clear conservation targets (Brooks et al., 2006; MEA, 2005), and biodiversity
has been recognized as an educational priority within the ‘Decade of Education for
Sustainable Development 2005–2014’ (UNESCO, 2005). Political parties, govern-
ments, and other stakeholders have committed to integrate biodiversity-related
issues into all levels of education (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/14, 2006), and first efforts
have already been made to fulfil this goal. For instance, in the USA the ‘Washington
Biodiversity Project’ (http://www.biodiversity.wa.gov/education/index.html) collects
curricula that already focus on biodiversity issues and illustrates, for teachers, how
they fit into national science standards. However, in parallel, few attempts have been
made to integrate biodiversity education into teacher education curricula (an exam-
ple from Jamaica, http://www.redinnovemos.org/content/view/862/20/lang,sp/, is a
notable exception), and little is known about how prepared and motivated preservice
teachers are to deliver biodiversity education in school. In this paper, we present
results from a multinational research project, carried out in four European countries,
on preservice teachers’ confidence and perceived competence to implement biodi-
versity education in primary school. Data were triangulated with findings from a
previous stage of research, that is document reviews and in-depth interviews with
teacher educators in the institutions the preservice teachers were enrolled in
(Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009).

Biodiversity—A normative conservation concept

Edward O. Wilson was the first to publish the term ‘biodiversity’, which was origi-
nally coined by W. J. Rosen, in the proceedings of a conference held in 1988
(Novacek, 2008; Wilson, 1988). In a strict scientific sense, the term biodiversity
refers to the variability among living organisms, including, inter alia, terrestrial,
marine and other aquatic ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2249

are part: this includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems
(Convention on Biological Diversity [CBD], 1992). Altered biodiversity either from
the loss of species or from the introduction of exotic species has led to a widespread
concern for a number of both market (e.g. for medicines) and non-market (e.g. ethi-
cal and aesthetic) reasons (see discussion in Hooper et al., 2005). This leads to the
notion that biodiversity is not only a scientific term but also a normative conserva-
tion concept which is linked to the idea of biological variation and its ecological,
economic, ethical, spiritual, and cultural values (Callicott, Crowder, & Mumford,
1999). In consequence, as multiple values are attached to biodiversity and its
conservation, the use of biodiversity and measures to conserve it can be discussed in
many ways—often controversially—which make it a challenge for both conservation
(Saunders, 2003; Trombulak et al., 2004) and education (Gayford, 2000; McLeish,
1997; Van Weelie & Wals, 2002).
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Biodiversity Education—More than teaching about nature

As a normative conservation concept, biodiversity is an important component of
education for sustainable development (ESD), as it reflects the interaction of ecolog-
ical, economic, and social issues well, and requires the learner to take into account
different perspectives to arrive at balanced viewpoints (Dreyfus, Wals, & Van
Weelie, 1999; Gayford, 2000; Menzel & Bögeholz, 2008). Within the framework of
ESD, biodiversity education requires the construction and critical use of knowledge,
the critical analysis of the role of natural science, an awareness of the scientific and
non-scientific aspects, that is the benefits and values attached to biodiversity and its
conservation, and appropriate pedagogical settings for in-depth discussion, reflec-
tion, and value formation (Gayford, 2000; McLeish, 1997; Van Weelie & Wals,
2002). Not only direct physical contact with the natural world but also social
connections with the local environment should be part of the biodiversity education
(Dawe, Jucker, & Martin, 2005; Gayford, 2000). Social connections with the local
environment can comprise both the involvement of local community members in
class activities and the investigation of environmental issues in the local community
by the students.
For the promotion of emotional connections with nature, value formation, and the
development of an environmental ethic, biodiversity education should also encour-
age students to become familiar with elements in nature, whether those elements are
particular animals, plants, species, places, or ecosystems (Novacek, 2008; Saunders,
2003). This might not be necessary in all parts of the world, as people’s experiences
with the natural world and their environmental literacy may vary strongly within and
among cultures (Cole, 2007). However, in many European countries, the USA and
Australia, children’s outdoor experiences with nature are currently decreasing, espe-
cially in urban areas (Louv, 2006; Malone & Tranter, 2003; Prezza, Alparone, Cris-
tallo, & Secchiano, 2005; Thomas & Thompson, 2004). Important factors that limit
children’s outdoor experiences are parental perceptions of social and traffic danger
(Prezza et al., 2005; Robertson, 2006; Valentine & McKendrick, 1997), and the
 2250 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

actual loss of ‘wild’ habitats children would like for outdoor play and nature investi-
gation activities (Louv, 2006). Moreover, electronic/video games and television keep
children inside and thus contribute to a reduction in children’s independent outdoor
experiences (Aitken, 2001; McKendrick, Bradford, & Fielder, 2000).
By introducing activities that promote awe and wonder of the living world and
sensitivity to care for organisms and their habitats, a personal association with nature
can be developed (Barker & Slingsby, 1998; Barker, Slingsby, & Tilling, 2002;
Kassas, 2002). Students in primary schools are an important target group, as
frequent outdoor experiences and contact with nature during childhood may be
essential for a later connection with and care for the environment (Bögeholz, 2006;
Chawla, 1998; Meinhold & Malkus, 2005; Palmberg & Kuru, 2000; Ward
Thompson et al., 2004). However, as long as (preservice) teachers do not realise the
necessity or do not feel confident to implement outdoor nature activities in school,
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

children will continue to have few opportunities for such experiences (e.g. Louv,
2006).

General Overview of the Project and Study Objectives

The present study was part of a large research project entitled ‘Biodiversity as a
value and concept in education: initial education and professional readiness of
primary student teachers’. The overall aim of the project was to assess the impor-
tance given to biodiversity education in the preservice education of primary school
teachers in four European countries, and to investigate the competence and motiva-
tion of both preservice and novice teachers to implement biodiversity education in
school. One teacher education institution in each of four different countries was
selected as a case study due to the institution’s strong involvement in biodiversity
education. The work was carried out between 2004 and 2007 in three phases:
Phase 1 examined, with the help of document analyses and in-depth interviews with
27 teacher educators, the integration of biodiversity into the preservice teacher
education programmes. The teacher educators (seven in Cyprus, eight in the UK,
six in Switzerland, and six in Germany) were from the natural and social sciences
and the arts. They were teaching modules which had been identified in the docu-
ment analyses as relevant to biodiversity education (Kadji-Beltran, Constantinou,
Lindemann-Matthies, & Zacharias, 2006; Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009). Phase
2 (present study) investigated, with the help of a written questionnaire, the confi-
dence and perceived competence of preservice teachers to implement biodiversity
education in school, and satisfaction with their respective teacher education. Phase 3
studied young teachers’ perceived usefulness of their initial education and actual
engagement in biodiversity education.
According to the in-depth interviews (Phase 1), all teacher educators thought it
necessary to prepare preservice primary teachers on how to address biodiversity in
schools (Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009). However, it was also apparent from the
first phase of the overall project that due to time constraints and a need to cover their
respective curriculum, teacher educators felt unable to give sufficient attention to
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2251

biodiversity education in their classes. If they approached it (in the natural science
modules), they focused mainly on scientific aspects. Non-scientific aspects or meth-
odological approaches needed to deal with the controversial nature of biodiversity
were rarely included. Modules including biodiversity were all optional for preservice
teachers not specializing in science. It can thus be assumed that in the teacher prep-
aration systems investigated, preservice teachers will gain little insight into biodiver-
sity education.
How people behave can often be better predicted by their beliefs about their
capabilities (perceived self-efficacy) than by what they are actually capable of accom-
plishing (Bandura, 1986, 1997; Schunk, 1985). Perceived self-efficacy is defined as
‘people’s judgements of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of actions
required to attain designed types of performance’ (Bandura, 1986, p. 391). Self-
efficacy arises from the gradual acquisition of complex cognitive, social, linguistic,
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

and/or physical skills through experience, and is task-specific (Gist, 1987). Self-
efficacy beliefs are strong predictors of related performance which means that the
confidence people bring to a specific task plays a strong role in their success or fail-
ure to complete the task (Pajares & Johnson, 1994). It should be noted that the
construct of ‘self-efficacy’ differs from the colloquial term ‘confidence’. Confidence
is a non-descript term that refers to the strength of belief but does not necessarily
specify what the certainty is about (Bandura, 1997). In this paper, however, the term
‘confidence’ refers to the confidence of preservice teachers to perform specific tasks
and is thus used more in the sense of self-efficacy than in its colloquial meaning.
A strong sense of efficacy enhances human accomplishment and personal well-
being in many ways (Bandura, 1994): People with high assurance in their capabili-
ties approach difficult tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than as threats to be
avoided. They set themselves challenging goals and maintain strong commitment to
them, and heighten and sustain their efforts in the face of failure. They quickly
recover their sense of efficacy after failures or setbacks, and attribute failure to insuf-
ficient effort or deficient knowledge and skills which are acquirable. As efficacious
people believe in their own capabilities, persist on tasks, take risks, and use innova-
tions (Moseley, Reinke, & Bookout, 2002), they meet the profile of teachers who
will more likely engage their students in biodiversity education under the framework
of ESD. The confidence people bring to a specific task strongly contributes to an
individual’s perceived competence, that is ‘the perception a person has concerning
his or her abilities’ (Losier & Vallerand, 1994, p. 793), which, in turn, is an impor-
tant determinant of a person’s intrinsic motivation and actual competence to carry
out a future task (Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Losier & Vallerand, 1994; Pajares,
1996). People who are confident that they have the ability to perform a certain task
will be more likely to engage in this task (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
The overall goal of the present study was to investigate how confident and compe-
tent preservice primary teachers felt about implementing certain activities related to
biodiversity education in school, and how satisfied they were with their respective
teacher education. As self-efficacy beliefs to accomplish certain tasks can be derived
from similar prior experiences (Bandura, 1997), preservice teachers’ experiences with
 2252 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

outdoor nature activities during their own secondary school education were investi-
gated. Outdoor nature activities were chosen as reconnecting children to nature
through relevant experiences in school is seen as one major task of biodiversity educa-
tion in European countries (Barker & Slingsby, 1998; Lindemann-Matthies, 2005).
Preservice teachers’ amount of training in certain aspects of biodiversity education
and their respective training satisfaction were also investigated, as both will modify
self-efficacy beliefs and perceived competence.

Main Research Questions

The main research questions of this study were as follows:
(1) How familiar are preservice primary teachers with the term biodiversity, and
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

where do they obtain their information from (initial teacher education, other
sources)?
(2) How confident do they feel to implement certain outdoor activities in school?
(3) How often do they have opportunities to participate in biodiversity education?
(4) How satisfied are they with their teacher preparation, and how competent do
they feel to facilitate science, non-science, and instrumental aspects of biodiver-
sity education in school?
(5) Are preservice primary teachers’ confidence and perceived competence to
implement biodiversity education in school related to their (1) teacher prepara-
tion, (2) secondary school experiences, and (3) personal expertize?

Methodology
Data Collection and Respondents
The teacher education institutions that formed the research network were selected
due to the staff’s involvement in biodiversity education as indicated by the study
records and engagement in curriculum planning activities. We also examined the
extent to which teacher education institutions advocate biodiversity education in their
respective countries. Finally, we took into consideration the stated commitment of
the institutions to promote inquiry-oriented teaching and learning. This information
helped us to select one institution in each country with a strong involvement in biodi-
versity education for the overall research project (best case scenarios). We addressed
teacher educators in these institutions who were known to us either personally or
from the literature, and invited them (and later on also their colleagues) to participate
in the project. Responses were positive in all cases. In all data collection exercises, we
guaranteed individual anonymity to our study participants. We also agreed not to
reveal the identity of the teacher education institutions which, in consequence, did
not allow us to present detailed module descriptions of the institutions’ study
programmes (for a brief summary see Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009).
In the present study, a written questionnaire was used. In Switzerland, the admin-
istration office of the respective teacher education institution helped us to distribute
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2253

the questionnaires by mail to their students. In the other three countries, teacher
educators who had participated in the interview part of the overall project helped us
to distribute the questionnaires in a number of courses. The questionnaires were
accompanied by a cover letter explaining the aims of the study and a return enve-
lope. The questionnaires were identical but had been translated from English into
Greek for the Cypriot and into German for the Swiss and German study partici-
pants. Bilingual colleagues helped us to ensure that the translation was accurate. To
test for the influence of the preparation intensity in certain aspects of biodiversity
education, preservice teachers in their first, second, and third year of study were
addressed. Although all programmes investigated have a four-year duration, fourth
year preservice teachers were not addressed as they were preparing for their final
exams.
Overall, 680 preservice teachers (88% women) participated in the study (210 in
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Cyprus, 330 in Switzerland, 73 in the UK, and 67 in Germany). They were all
undergraduates and most of them were in their second or third year of study (first
year, 22%; second year, 41%; third year, 37%). The response rate was 33% in
Switzerland (about 1,000 questionnaires had been mailed) and 100% in the other
three countries. The sample represented approximately 30% of the population of
preservice teachers at these institutions.

Instrument
Question 1. The first items of the questionnaire briefly examined the contribution of
the teacher preparation system to preservice teachers’ general familiarity with biodi-
versity. Study participants were asked to indicate their familiarity with the term
biodiversity on a five-step scale (from 1 = unfamiliar to 5 = familiar), and to select
from a list of eight potential information sources about biodiversity (including
teacher education) the ones they were using. The list also included the response
option that the term biodiversity had never been heard before (see questionnaire in
Appendix).
The subsequent items of the questionnaire are related to the scientific, non-scien-
tific, and instrumental aspects of biodiversity education (overview in Table 1).
Specific content-knowledge questions were not asked, as prior document analyses
and interviews with teacher educators had shown that information on biodiversity
was only provided in some science and environmental modules, of which not all
were compulsory (Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009). In case some study partici-
pants were totally unfamiliar with the term biodiversity, a definition was included in
the questionnaire (see Appendix). Examples for scientific, non-scientific, and instru-
mental aspects of biodiversity education were originally compiled by Gayford (2000,
p. 355) during focus group discussions with teachers in the UK. Scientific aspects of
biodiversity relate, for instance, to the meaning of biodiversity, endangered species,
and the interconnection of the decline of biodiversity with other phenomena such as
climate change and habitat destruction. Non-scientific aspects of biodiversity relate,
for instance, to the controversial discussion of the use of biodiversity and its
 2254 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

conservation, to the different values attached to it, and to the methodological

approaches on how to deal with this. Instrumental aspects relate to ways in which an
institution can support and encourage biodiversity education and the development
of behaviours that are appropriate (see Gayford, 2000).

Question 2. Study participants were asked to judge their confidence to implement

certain outdoor activities in school (Table 1, I1–I8). The items on the confidence
scale covered typical and specific tasks under the domain of outdoor education, and
should thus have high predictive power for actual performance (see Bandura, 1986).
We were especially interested in preservice teachers’ confidence to make use of easily
accessible settings like school grounds or the near surroundings of schools, because a
short distance between school and study site saves not only money for transportation
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

but also valuable teaching time—two factors that might otherwise restrict the teach-
ers’ willingness to engage in outdoor education (Keown, 1986; Lock, 1998). One
item (I6) asked explicitly for teacher students’ confidence to investigate organisms by
using senses, as sense-using activities might especially strengthen children’s empathic
relationship with nature. Another item (I7) asked about the confidence of using
scientific methods. Studies have shown that primary school children are already capa-
ble of engaging in (simple) scientific practices, and should be trained accordingly
(Lindemann-Matthies, 2006; Metz, 2004), but that primary teachers might tend to
avoid science-related activities in school as they do not always have a strong orienta-
tion towards the science (Appleton, 2003; Howitt, 2007; Powers, 2004).

Question 3. To investigate the participants’ prior study experiences, they were asked
to state how often they had had opportunities to enrol in certain aspects of biodiver-
sity education during teacher education (Table 1, I9–I18).

Question 4. The following items (Table 1, I19–I35) were only to be answered by

study participants who, by the time of the questionnaire administration, had already
attended modules relevant to biodiversity education. These modules had been iden-
tified in the previous stage of our research (Phase 1), and were specified for each
institution in the respective faculty questionnaire. The ‘expert’ study participants
were asked to state their satisfaction with the teacher education received (Table 1,
I19–I25), and to judge their competence to implement science, non-science, and
instrumental aspects of biodiversity education in school (Table 1, I26–I35). Items
I29–I35 referred to biodiversity education as a process-oriented, participatory, and
action-oriented learning approach, in which educators function as role models (I32)
and feel competent to initiate physical and social connections with the local environ-
ment for their students (Dawe et al., 2005).

Question 5. To test whether confidence and perceived competence are related to

prior experiences, participants were asked to indicate how often they were involved
 Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013
Table 1. Design of the questionnaire: assignment of items (I1–I35) to criteria of good biodiversity education
Confidence (1 = unconfident,
5 = confident) to …
Scientific
aspects
Non-scientific
aspects
Instrumental - Play environmental games in
aspects school grounds (I1)
- Keep school grounds tidy (I2)
- Visit local environmental centres
(I3)
- Work in school gardens (I4)
- Investigate organisms in school
grounds (I5)
- Investigate organisms close to
school using senses (I6)
- Investigate organisms close to
school by means of scientific
methods (I7)
- Investigate organisms in the wild
(I8)
Amount of training Satisfaction with training Perceived competence
received (1 = never, (1 = unsatisfied, (1 = incompetent,
5 = very often) to … 5 = satisfied) on … 5 = competent) to …
- Learn about - Information on local - Teach environmental issues in
environmental issues (I9) environmental issues (I19) school (I26)
- Learn about biodiversity - Information on global - Teach biodiversity issues in
issues (I10) environmental issues (I20) school (I27)
- Discuss environmental - Handling of controversial - Discuss biodiversity as a
issues (I11) issues (I21) controversial issue (I28)
- Discuss biodiversity - Information on
issues (I12) environmental education
philosophy (I22)
- Investigate the natural - Organization of outdoor - Implement simple sense-using
environment by activities (I23) activities in nature (I29)
observing, measuring, … - Organization of - Use demonstrations to help
(I13) environmental games students understand natural
- Teach environmental (I24) phenomena (I30)
issues in science classes - Value-development - Use experiments to help
in school (I14) techniques (I25) students understand natural
- Do environmental phenomena (I31)
projects as assignments - Be responsible for a school’s
(I15) recycling programme (I32)
- Observe how an - Organize assemblies on
environmental education environmental issues (I33)
programme operates in - Involve local community
school (I16) members in class activities
- Visit local environmental (I34)
centres (I17) - Investigate environmental
Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education
- Teach environmental issues in local community (I35)
education in school (I18)
2255
 2256 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

in each outdoor activity listed in Table 1 (I1–I8) during their own secondary educa-
tion (never, once a year, two to eight times a year, two to three times a month, more
often). Secondary instead of primary school experiences were asked for, as they
might be easier to recall. Study participants were also asked to indicate how many
local wild plant and animal species they could identify by name (none, 1–5, 6–10,
11–20, more than 20), as a lack of knowledge about organisms has been found to
strongly impede outdoor nature investigations (Brewer, 2002).
Teacher educators, who had participated in the first phase of the overall project,
were asked to evaluate the content validity of the items in the questionnaire. Based
on their comments, the final items were formulated and tested in a pilot study with
three to five preservice teachers in each country. The participants needed approxi-
mately 15 minutes to complete the questionnaire.
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Statistical Analysis
Chi-square tests were used to test the differences between participants from the four
institutions in their use of information sources about biodiversity. One-way analyses
of variance were carried out to test the effect of the education institution on study
participants’ familiarity with biodiversity and amount of training received in certain
aspects of biodiversity education (five-step scales).
General linear models (Type I sums of squares) were used to identify possible
predictors for study participants’ confidence and perceived competence to apply
biodiversity education in school (items in Table 1). Because this type of analysis
does not allow strong correlations between explanatory variables, Pearson correla-
tions between the explanatory variables were tested first. Only variables with r <
0.350 were included in the models (Crawley, 2005). As study participants’ self-esti-
mated knowledge of animals was strongly correlated with those of plants (r = 0.75),
only the latter was included in the analyses.
In the case of participants’ training experiences (see Table 1, I9–I18), the number
of variables was reduced by factor analysis (eigenvalues > 1). An orthogonal type of
factor rotation (varimax) was used according to the recommendations in Frane and
Hill (1976). Two factors were extracted and used in the analyses. The first factor
(education) described participants’ training experiences in the teacher education
institutions. Items I9–13, I15, and I17 loaded high with this factor (factor scores
between 0.82 and 0.50). The second factor (practice) described participants’ oppor-
tunities for practical experiences in school. Items I14, I16, and I18 loaded high with
this factor (scores between 0.90 and 0.61).
To test for confidence, the following variables were included in the models: self-
estimated knowledge of plants (five-step scale) and amount of training received
(reduced to two factors) as covariates, and teacher education institution and enrol-
ment in certain outdoor activities during secondary education as factors. To test for
perceived competence, the following variables were used: self-estimated knowledge
of plants (five-step scale) and amount of training received (reduced to two factors) as
covariates, and teacher education institution as factor. As the proportion of
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2257

biodiversity-related modules attended was strongly correlated with Factor 1 (r =

0.43), only the latter was included in the analyses. All analyses were carried out with
SPSS for Windows 12.0.1.

Results
Familiarity with Biodiversity and Sources of Information Used
Study participants felt rather unfamiliar with the term biodiversity (mean score 2.8 ±
0.05 on the five-step rating scale). About 24% stated that they had never heard the
term prior to the questionnaire administration. However, there were large differences
between participants from the different teacher education institutions (F3,665 = 17.66,
p < 0.001). The British participants felt more familiar with the term (3.6 ± 0.15) than
the German (3.1 ± 0.16), Cypriot (2.9 ± 0.09) and Swiss ones (2.5 ± 0.07). With
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

increasing year of study, only the German participants became more familiar with the
term (r = 0.42, p > 0.001).
More than 70% of the British and the German study participants, about 50% of
the Cypriot but less than 10% of the Swiss participants regarded their initial teacher
education as a source of information about biodiversity (Figure 1). When only data
from the most advanced preservice teachers (third year of study) were included in
the analysis, 100% of the German, 76% of the Cypriot, 72% of the British but still
only 17% of the Swiss ones stated their teacher education as a source of information
about biodiversity. Print and electronic media as well as secondary school education
were major information sources for the British participants, but hardly relevant for
the others (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Sources of information about biodiversity. Preservice teachers ( N = 680) in four European institutions (Cyprus, UK, Switzerland, Germany) were asked to indicate where they had come across biodiversity by choosing the appropriate answers out of nine pre-constructed ones. Chi-square tests (df = 2) were carried out to test for differences between the four groups (friends and family: p > 0.05; all other sources: p < 0.001, Chi-square values between 24.90 and 209.55)

Confidence to Apply Outdoor Activities in School

Study participants felt rather confident to apply certain outdoor activities in school
(mean scores between 3.3 and 4.3 on the five-step scales). They felt most confident
to keep the school grounds tidy and to investigate organisms close to school by using
senses (Figure 2). However, the British participants felt especially unconfident to
play environmental games in the school grounds, whereas the Swiss ones felt quite
confident to apply outdoor activities later on in school.
± 1SE

Study participants’ self-estimated knowledge of local wild plants and animals was
Figure 2. Confidence to apply outdoor activities. Preservice teachers in four European institutions were asked to indicate their confidence to apply certain outdoor activities in school. Numbers on the x-axis denote confidence level (1, unconfident; 2, rather unconfident; 3, neither/nor; 4, rather confident; 5, confident). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by overall mean (item-ID in brackets). Symbols denote mean scores on the five-step scales, horizontal bars

quite limited. More than 70% of the participants felt that they could identify less
than 11 wild plants by name (no plant, 4%; less than six plants, 48%; less than
11 plants, 71%; less than 21 plants, 89%) and about 60% felt so for animals (no
animal, 1%; less than six animals, 34%; less than 11 animals, 61%; less than
21 animals, 83%).
In the models (R2 between 0.05 and 0.26), study participants’ confidence to carry
out outdoor activities as a teacher differed significantly among the education institu-
tions (Table 2; see Figure 2). Confidence was positively related to a person’s
taxonomic knowledge (self-estimated number of local wild organisms that could be
 2258 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Figure 1. Sources of information about biodiversity. Preservice teachers (N = 680) in four

European institutions (Cyprus, UK, Switzerland, Germany) were asked to indicate where they had
come across biodiversity by choosing the appropriate answers out of nine pre-constructed ones.
Chi-square tests (df = 2) were carried out to test for differences between the four groups (friends
and family: p > 0.05; all other sources: p < 0.001, Chi-square values between 24.90 and 209.55)

identified by name), personal classroom experiences, and classroom observations

(summarized in Factor 2) and, to a minor degree, other study experiences during
teacher education (Factor 1).
Moreover, own school experiences mattered. Preservice teachers who had at least
twice a year practised certain outdoor activities during secondary education felt
more confident than those who had not played environmental games in the school
grounds (mean scores 3.7 ± 0.15 and 3.1 ± 0.06, respectively, on the five-step scale),
and to investigate organisms close to school by using senses (4.1 ± 0.08 and 3.8 ±
0.05), by means of scientific methods (3.5 ± 0.09 and 3.3 ± 0.06), and in the wild
(3.8 ± 0.09 and 3.6 ± 0.06).

Teacher Preparation in Biodiversity Education

The amount of instruction a person receives during teacher education strongly
depends on his or her year of study. To illustrate the teacher preparation in
different aspects of biodiversity education (see Table 1) in the four institutions,
only data from the most advanced participants (third year of study) are shown.
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2259
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Figure 2. Confidence to apply outdoor activities. Preservice teachers in four European

institutions were asked to indicate their confidence to apply certain outdoor activities in school.
Numbers on the x-axis denote confidence level (1, unconfident; 2, rather unconfident; 3, neither/
nor; 4, rather confident; 5, confident). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by overall mean (item-ID
in brackets). Symbols denote mean scores on the five-step scales, horizontal bars ± 1SE

Although almost at the end of their studies, they had received little practical
school experiences (Figure 3, compare Table 1). Most of all, they had received
opportunities to investigate the natural environment and to discuss environmen-
tal issues. However, large differences between the teacher education institutions
were identified. The British preservice teachers had received the most, and the
Swiss ones the least amount of training in almost all aspects investigated (see
Figure 3).
±
Figure
1SE. 3.
Teacher
Training
preparation
received.
differed
Preservice
strongly
teachers
between
in their
the third
four institutions
year of study
(all(110
p <in0.001,
Switzerland,
df = 3 and
25 232,
in Germany,
F values62
between
in Cyprus,
5.0439
and
in45.28;
Switzerland)
F values
assessed
are based
their
onpreparation
one-way analyses
in certain
of aspects
variance)
of bioversity education (see Table 1). Numbers on the x-axis denote training intensity (1, never; 2, rarely; 3, sometimes; 4, often; 5, very often). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by overall mean (item-ID in brackets). Symbols denote mean scores on the five-step scales, horizontal bars

Satisfaction with Teacher Preparation in Biodiversity Education

Study participants who had already attended modules relevant to biodiversity educa-
tion at the time of the questionnaire administration (67%) were asked how satisfied
they were with certain aspects of their teacher education. On average, these partici-
pants had attended 20% of the biodiversity-relevant modules offered by their respec-
tive teacher education programmes (median 20%, range 4–100%). Overall, they
were only moderately satisfied with their training received, although large differences
between the education institutions occurred (Figure 4). Participants from the British
institution were especially satisfied with the content information received on local
and global environmental issues, but rather unsatisfied with their training on how to
deal with the non-scientific aspects of biodiversity education (see Table 1).
 Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

2260

Table 2. Variables correlated to confidence to apply certain outdoor activities in school

F values

Education Factor 1 Factor 2 Secondary school Taxonomic

institution (education) (practice) experience knowledge
(df = 3) (df = 1) (df = 1) (df = 4) (df = 1)
P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

Confidence to …
Play environmental games in school grounds (1) 54.01*** 6.18* 24.98*** 16.53***
Keep school grounds tidy (2) 30.20*** 32.29*** 39.27***
Visit local environmental centres (3) 8.08*
Work in school gardens (4) 12.41*** 9.08*
Investigate organisms in school grounds (5) 2.64* 15.83*** 22.07***
Investigate organisms close to school by using senses (6) 4.87** 16.18*** 7.39** 15.67***
Investigate organisms close to school by means of scientific methods (7) 10.73*** 15.05*** 25.80*** 7.50**
Investigate organisms in the wild (8) 3.34* 15.44*** 4.32* 19.29***

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Note. Data were analyzed by general linear models (Type I sums of squares). Only significant effects are shown. Denominator degrees of freedom
are 617–651.
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2261
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Figure 3. Training received. Preservice teachers in their third year of study (110 in Switzerland,
25 in Germany, 62 in Cyprus, 39 in the UK) assessed their preparation in certain aspects of
bioversity education (see Table 1). Numbers on the x-axis denote training intensity (1, never;
2, rarely; 3, sometimes; 4, often; 5, very often). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by overall mean
(item-ID in brackets). Symbols denote mean scores on the five-step scales, horizontal bars ± 1SE.
Teacher preparation differed strongly between the four institutions (all p < 0.001, df = 3 and 232,
F values between 5.04 and 45.28; F values are based on one-way analyses of variance)

Participants from the Swiss and German institutions were rather unsatisfied,
whereas the Cypriot ones were rather satisfied with almost all aspects investigated
(see Figure 4).
The more advanced participants were in their ‘biodiversity studies’ (proportion
of biodiversity-related modules attended), the less satisfied they were with their
respective education in non-science and instrumental aspects of biodiversity educa-
tion, that is value development techniques, organization of environmental games,
and information received on environmental education philosophy (linear regression
analyses: all b between −0.12 and −0.01, all p between 0.040 and <0.001), but the
more satisfied they were in science aspects, that is the information received on
local (b = 0.007, p = 0.015) and global environmental issues (b = 0.006, p =
0.031).
Figure
mean scores
4. Training
on the five-step
satisfaction.
scales,
Preservice
horizontal bars ±in1SE.
teachers fourTraining
Europeansatisfaction
institutionsdiffered
who hadstrongly
participated
between
in modules
the four institutions
relevant to (all
biodiversity
p < 0.001,
education
df = 3 and
were
668,
asked
F values
to indicate
between
how7.35
satisfied
and 122.21;
they were
F values
with aspects
are based
of their
on one-way
respective
analyses
training
of variance)
(see Table 1). Numbers on the x-axis denote level of satisfaction (1, unsatisfied; 2, rather unsatisfied; 3, neither/nor; 4, rather satisfied; 5, satisfied). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by overall mean (item-ID in brackets). Symbols denote

Perceived Competence to Implement Biodiversity Education in School

Study participants who had attended modules relevant to biodiversity education
were asked how competent they felt to integrate certain aspects of biodiversity
 2262 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Figure 4. Training satisfaction. Preservice teachers in four European institutions who had
participated in modules relevant to biodiversity education were asked to indicate how satisfied
they were with aspects of their respective training (see Table 1). Numbers on the x-axis denote
level of satisfaction (1, unsatisfied; 2, rather unsatisfied; 3, neither/nor; 4, rather satisfied;
5, satisfied). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by overall mean (item-ID in brackets). Symbols
denote mean scores on the five-step scales, horizontal bars ± 1SE. Training satisfaction differed
strongly between the four institutions (all p < 0.001, df = 3 and 668, F values between 7.35 and
122.21; F values are based on one-way analyses of variance)

education in school. Overall, they felt moderately to rather competent (Figure 5).
They felt least competent to teach biodiversity issues in school and to organize
assemblies on environmental issues, whereas they felt most competent to implement
sense-using activities in nature. The British and Cypriot study participants felt more
competent than the others to integrate biodiversity issues in school, to investigate
environmental issues in the local communities, and to discuss controversial issues
(see Figure 5).
bars ± 1SE

There was a positive correlation between the amount of both theoretical and prac-
Figure 5.
overall mean
Competence
(item-ID intobrackets).
carry outSymbols
biodiversity
denote
education.
mean scores
Preservice
on theteachers
five-stepinscales,
four European
horizontalinstitutions who had participated in modules relevant to biodiversity education were asked to indicate how competent they were to implement aspects of biodiversity education in school (see Table 1). Numbers on the x-axis denote level of competence (1, incompetent; 2, rather incompetent; 3, neither/nor; 4, rather competent; 5, competent). Activities on the y-axis are sorted by

tical experiences during teacher education and the perceived competence of preser-
vice teachers to apply elements of environmental and biodiversity education as a
teacher in school (Table 3). A good knowledge of local wild plants (and animals)
added strongly to the competence to carry out simple sense-using activities in nature.

Discussion
Teacher education was the most important information source about biodiversity for
the study participants, except for the Swiss ones. However, in light of the finding
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2263
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

Figure 5. Competence to carry out biodiversity education. Preservice teachers in four European
institutions who had participated in modules relevant to biodiversity education were asked to
indicate how competent they were to implement aspects of biodiversity education in school (see
Table 1). Numbers on the x-axis denote level of competence (1, incompetent; 2, rather
incompetent; 3, neither/nor; 4, rather competent; 5, competent). Activities on the y-axis are
sorted by overall mean (item-ID in brackets). Symbols denote mean scores on the five-step scales,
horizontal bars ± 1SE

that study participants felt at most moderately familiar with the term biodiversity,
the education provided seemed hardly sufficient, which was also evident from the
preceding document analyses and interviews with teacher educators (Lindemann-
Matthies et al., 2009). Overall, the participants’ unfamiliarity with biodiversity is not
surprising. Recent studies have shown that nearly 20 years after the first usage of the
term biodiversity (Wilson, 1988), the public, including high school students and
science teachers, has little knowledge about biodiversity, its loss and conservation
(Ayres, 1998; Hunter & Brehm, 2003; Lindemann-Matthies & Bose, 2008; Turner-
Erfort, 1997). Teacher educators should thus not expect that schools or other
sources provide sufficient background knowledge about biodiversity. However, this
was actually the case in the Swiss teacher education institution (Lindemann-
Matthies et al., 2009). There, teacher educators reasoned that it was the responsibil-
ity of secondary education to provide information on biodiversity (which is not the
case in Switzerland; Lindemann-Matthies & Bose, 2008), and that their preservice
 Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

2264

Table 3. Variables correlated to competence to implement biodiversity education in school

F values

Education Factor 1 Factor 2 Taxonomic

institution (education) (practice) knowledge
(df = 3) (df = 1) (df = 1) (df = 1)

Competence to …
P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

Implement simple sense-using activities in nature (29) 5.96** 8.05** 16.81***

Discuss biodiversity as a controversial issues (28) 8.02*** 34.81***
Use experiments to help students understand natural phenomena (31) 4.89** 30.62*** 6.15*
Teach environmental issues in school (26) 3.57* 16.29*** 24.56***
Use demonstrations to help students understand natural phenomena (30) 37.79*** 14.26***
Investigate environmental issues in local community (35) 10.55*** 48.76*** 5.30*
Be responsible for the school’s recycling program (32) 18.10*** 33.87*** 4.77*
Involve local community members in class activities (34) 3.95** 23.69***
Teach biodiversity issues in school (27) 6.59*** 89.42*** 14.93*** 4.37*
Organize assemblies on environmental issues (33) 23.61*** 64.93*** 8.76*

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Note. Data were analyzed by general linear models (Type I sums of squares). Only significant effects are shown. Denominator degrees of freedom
are 446–449.
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2265

teachers mostly needed an in-depth education in teaching skills. In contrast, teacher

educators in the other institutions provided knowledge about biodiversity but
focused far less on teaching skills (Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009).
Other information sources about biodiversity such as electronic and print media
were only relevant for the British participants, which was also evident in another
study (Gayford, 2000). However, the media interpret environmental issues more
commonly in lay terms rather than in scientific terms (Michail, Stamou, & Stamou,
2007). In consequence, the media frequently do not provide in-depth knowledge on
the causes and probable effects of environmental issues, which is regarded as an
important pre-requisite for behavioural intentions to actually address such issues
(Bord, O’Connor, & Fisher, 2000; Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano, & Kalof, 1999).
However, profound science-based media presentations on biodiversity issues exist.
The present results could also indicate that study participants had not engaged with
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

such reports, for whatever reasons.

Overall, study participants felt fairly confident to apply outdoor activities in
school (all aspects measured scored at least 3 out of 5). Even the study of organ-
isms by means of scientific methods, although at the bottom of the rating list, was
considered as quite possible to engage in. These are pleasing results as one major
task of biodiversity education in European countries should be to reconnect chil-
dren to nature through relevant experiences in school (Barker et al., 2002; Barker
& Slingsby, 1998; Lindemann-Matthies, 2005). As people’s self-efficacy beliefs
and actual engagement in specific tasks are positively linked (Pintrich & Schunk,
2002), preservice teachers, who believe that they have the abilities to succeed in
outdoor activities, may be more willing to engage in these activities as practising
teachers. Study participants’ confidence to carry out outdoor activities in school
was related to their own respective secondary school experiences, practical school
experiences during teacher education, and an individual’s judgement of his or her
own knowledge of local organisms. This confirms findings from other studies that
nature-based investigations in school might actually be restricted by the belief of
teachers that they would require more specialist knowledge than they have
(Brewer, 2002).
The Swiss participants who had received the least preparation in all aspects stud-
ied (including the investigation of the natural environment) were similar or even
more confident than all others in most outdoor activities investigated. This could be
due to the different teaching approaches of the teacher education institutions
(Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009). In the institutions in Cyprus, the UK, and
Germany, the teaching focus placed more emphasis on content, whereas in
Switzerland a situated method-oriented approach was used which included empha-
sis on model lessons that can be applied one-to-one in school. A positive effect of
such an approach on preservice teachers’ confidence was also found in other studies
(Powers, 2004).
Study participants’ confidence to carry out outdoor activities, along with their
perceived competence, and thus motivation to teach environmental and biodiversity
issues in class, was correlated with personal teaching experiences and classroom
 2266 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

observations. Studies that have investigated how beginning primary school teachers
cope with science found a similar positive influence of prior classroom experiences,
that is experiences which lead to a first compilation of hands-on activities ‘that work’
(Appleton, 2003). However, perceived competence to implement science, non-
science, and instrumental aspects of biodiversity in class even more strongly
depended on training experiences in the education institutions themselves. This
shows that there is also a need for sound content knowledge provision in teacher
education. As the British study participants had received the most theoretical and
practical training of all, they felt more competent than the others in almost all
aspects investigated. In contrast, the Swiss study participants, who displayed strong
confidence due to prior similar experiences, that is rehearsed one-by-one lessons,
but lacked content knowledge on the science and non-science aspects of biodiver-
sity, felt least competent of all and were also rather dissatisfied with their respective
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

training. The German participants who had neither received much training in biodi-
versity education nor displayed strong confidence were also the ones least satisfied
with their respective training in almost all aspects investigated. As perceived compe-
tence is an important aspect of motivation (Losier & Vallerand, 1994), the Swiss and
German study participants might be less likely to implement biodiversity education
in school than the others.
Study participants felt more dissatisfied with their biodiversity education regard-
ing the non-science and instrumental aspects, the more experienced they became,
that is the more modules identified as relevant to biodiversity education they had
completed. In contrast, their satisfaction with coursework emphasizing biodiversity
content knowledge increased. However, study participants felt rather competent to
verbalize the controversial nature of biodiversity in school. This might be explained
by the finding that the majority of respondents had received some opportunities
during teacher education to discuss general environmental, although not specific,
biodiversity issues. Moreover, the ample use of inquiry as a teaching approach in all
education institutions investigated (Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009) might have
contributed to the development of critical thinking skills within the normal curricu-
lum (see also McGuinness, 1999). Due to their confidence to apply outdoor nature
investigations, and also probably due to the frequent use of inquiry-based learning
approaches, study participants also felt quite competent to use experiments and
demonstrations in school.
The relationship between confidence, perceived competence, and actual teaching
performance warrants further investigation. On the one hand, motivational aspects
of teacher education programmes are thought to have an important impact on subse-
quent teaching practice, on an equal footing with background knowledge and knowl-
edge about teaching and learning. On the other hand, the barriers that intervene
between the teacher preparation phase and actual teaching, including extensive time
lapses in some countries along with the various administrative and curricular
constraints that educational systems tend to impose, may have an influence on this
relationship that goes beyond the context of teacher education institutions or formal
teacher preparation programmes.
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2267

Limitations
Caution should be exercised in generalizing the results of this study. We investigated
four teacher preparation programmes regarding biodiversity education with only one
teacher education institution in each country. Differences found between institu-
tions can thus not be interpreted as general differences between countries. Due to
the non-random sample of teacher education institutions, our study participants are
also probably not representative of preservice teachers in general. Moreover,
although confidence and perceived competence are important aspects of motivation,
a person’s enthusiasm and commitment to the implementation of biodiversity
education might be diminished by other factors such as classroom management,
discipline problems, and the task of teaching itself when entering school as a teacher
(Luft, 2007). The time elapsing between the measurement of confidence, perceived
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

competence, and actual performance affects the strength of the relationship, which is
most accurately revealed when measurements are close (Losier & Vallerand, 1994).
For these reasons, it has been suggested that future studies should follow teachers
from the early part of their initial certification programmes through their induction
years and on to the early phases of their careers (Luft, 2007). However, in the
present study this was not possible due to time and financial restrictions.

Conclusions
As one teacher educator in the previous stage of the overall project pointed out
(Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2009), today’s (preservice) teachers need to be well
prepared to answer questions regarding species, their interactions with the environ-
ment, and biodiversity conservation because biodiversity education is becoming
more and more important, albeit slowly, in schools. An important task of systems of
teacher education should thus be to prepare their preservice teachers to carry out
biodiversity education in primary school (Barker & Elliot, 2000). As the present
findings indicate, teacher educators should not expect that the biodiversity knowl-
edge is already provided by other sources.
Due to negative conceptions of science or a lack of confidence in doing science,
primary school teachers are often quite reluctant to use the outdoors as a teaching
environment (Brewer, 2002; Howitt, 2007). Helping them to become confident in
using out-of-classroom settings as a place for learning should, therefore, be an
important task for primary teacher preparation, and is regarded as an important
starting point for ESD (Bögeholz, 2006). The results of the present study indicate
that actual experience of outdoor teaching during teacher education and also the use
of inquiry as a teaching approach contribute to preservice teachers’ intrinsic motiva-
tion to engage their future students in hands-on outdoor activities. However, moti-
vation was to some extent also related to secondary school experiences with outdoor
activities as well as knowledge about local organisms. If such experiences and exper-
tise are diminishing, teacher education has to compensate for it if we want teachers
who can support their students in developing an empathetic perspective towards the
 2268 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

environment. Although a survey from the USA suggests that conservation education
is more effective by increasing general environmental concern than by providing
knowledge about species (Hunter & Rinner, 2004) in teaching students to care
about biodiversity, a knowledge of at least the common organisms around them is
seen as vital (Balmford, Clegg, Coulson, & Taylor, 2002; Barker et al., 2002;
Bebbington, 2005).
It seems to be worthwhile to place importance on model lessons both in- and
outdoors that preservice teachers can later use in their own teaching, as the Swiss
case study demonstrates. However, the Swiss example also shows that good teacher
preparation requires more than just the application of model lessons. There is also a
need for sound content knowledge provision of, for instance, the different meanings,
interpretations and uses of biodiversity, and ways of how to discuss its normative
character (see Gayford, 2000; Van Weelie & Wals, 2002). On the other hand,
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

programmes that concentrate exclusively on filling preservice teachers’ knowledge

gaps about biodiversity, as exemplified by the German case study, have the draw-
back that future teachers are left without the basic grounding in sequencing and
implementing teaching and learning activities that are necessary for establishing a
minimum level of confidence and competence. For a more effective biodiversity
education, programmes should strike a balance between the provision of sound
content knowledge and opportunities for preservice teachers to obtain practical
teaching experiences.

References
Aitken, S. (2001). Global crises of childhood: Rights, justice and the unchildlike child. Area, 33,
119–127.
Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an
understanding of science teaching practice. Research in Science Education, 33, 1–25.
Ayres, E. (1998, September 16). Worldwatch report: Fastest mass extinction in Earth history.
Environmental News Network.
Balmford, A., & Bond, W. (2005). Trends in the state of nature and their implications for human
well-being. Ecology Letters, 8, 1218–1234.
Balmford, A., Clegg, L., Coulson, T., & Taylor, J. (2002). Why conservationists should heed
Pokemon. Science, 295, 2367.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior
(Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). New York: Academic Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest
through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.
Barker, S., & Elliot, P. (2000). Planning a skills-based resource for biodiversity education. Journal
of Biological Education, 34, 123–127.
Barker, S., & Slingsby, D. (1998). From nature table to niche: Curriculum progression in ecologi-
cal concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 479–486.
Barker, S., Slingsby, D., & Tilling, S. (2002). Ecological fieldwork: Is there a problem? Environ-
mental Education, 71(autumn), 9–10.
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2269

Bebbington, A. (2005). The ability of A-level students to name plants. Journal of Biological
Education, 39, 62–67.
Bord, R. J., O’Connor, R. E., & Fisher, A. (2000). In what sense does the public need to under-
stand global climate change? Public Understanding of Science, 9, 205–218.
Brewer, C. (2002). Conservation education partnerships in schoolyard laboratories: A call back to
action. Conservation Biology, 16, 577–579.
Brooks, T. M., Mittermeier, R. A., da Fonseca, G. A. B., Gerlach, J., Hoffmann, M., Lamoreux,
J. F., … Rodrigues, A. S. L. (2006). Global biodiversity conservation priorities. Science, 313,
58–61.
Bögeholz, S. (2006). Nature experience and its importance for environmental knowledge, values
and action: Recent German empirical contributions. Environmental Education Research, 12,
65–84.
Callicott, J. B., Crowder, L. B., & Mumford, K. (1999). Current normative concepts in conserva-
tion. Conservation Biology, 13, 22–35.
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant life experiences revisited: A review of research on sources of
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

environmental sensitivity. Environmental Education Research, 4, 369–382.

Cole, A. G. (2007). Expanding the field: Revisiting environmental education principles through
multidisciplinary frameworks. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38, 35–44.
Convention on Biological Diversity (1992). Convention on biological diversity. Retrieved February
18, 2008, from http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp.
Crawley, M. J. (2005). Statistics: an introduction using R. Chichester: Wiley.
Dawe, G., Jucker, R., & Martin, S. (2005). Sustainable development in higher education: Current
practice and future developments. Heslington, York: Higher Education Academy.
Dreyfus, A., Wals, A., & Van Weelie, D. (1999). Biodiversity as a postmodern theme for environ-
mental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 4, 155–175.
Frane, J. W., & Hill, M. (1976). Factor analysis as a tool for data analysis. Communications in
Statistics, Part A: Theory and Methods, 5, 487–506.
Gayford, C. (2000). Biodiversity education: A teacher’s perspective. Environmental Education
Research, 6, 347–361.
Gist, M. E. (1987). Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behaviour and human resource
management. The Academy of Management Review, 12, 472–485.
Hooper, D. U., Chapin III, F. S., Ewel, J. J., Hector, A., Inchausti, P., Lavorel, S., … Wardle, D.A.
(2005). Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning. Ecological Monographs, 75, 3–35.
Howitt, C. (2007). Pre-service primary teachers’ perceptions of factors in a holistic method course
influencing their confidence in teaching science. Research in Science Education, 37, 41–58.
Hunter, L. M., & Brehm, J. (2003). Qualitative insight into public knowledge of, and concern
with, biodiversity. Human Ecology, 31, 309–320.
Hunter, L. M., & Rinner, L. (2004). The association between environmental perspective and
knowledge and concern with species diversity. Society and Natural Resources, 17, 517–532.
Kadji-Beltran, C., Constantinou, C. P., Lindemann-Matthies, P., & Zacharias, Z. (2006).
Diversity in environmental education: the pre-service training of primary school teachers. In
L. Filho & M. Salomone (Eds.), Innovative approaches to education for sustainable development
(pp. 65–72). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Kassas, M. (2002). Environmental education: Biodiversity. The Environmentalist, 22, 345–351.
Keown, D. (1986). Teaching science in US secondary schools: A survey. The Journal of Environ-
mental Education, 18, 23–29.
Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2005). ‘Loveable’ mammals and ‘lifeless’ plants: How children’s interest
in common local organisms can be enhanced through observation of nature. International
Journal of Science Education, 27, 655–677.
Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2006). Investigating nature on the way to school: Responses to an
educational programme by teachers and their pupils. International Journal of Science Education,
28, 895–918.
 2270 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

Lindemann-Matthies, P., & Bose, E. (2008). How many species are there? Public understanding
and awareness of biodiversity in Switzerland. Human Ecology, 38, 731–742.
Lindemann-Matthies, P., Constantinou, C. P., Junge X., Köhler K., Mayer J., Nagel U., … Kadji-
Beltran, C. (2009). The integration of biodiversity education in the initial education of
primary school teachers: Four comparative case studies from Europe. Environmental Education
Research, 15, 17–37.
Lock, R. (1998). Fieldwork in the life sciences. International Journal of Science Education, 20,
633–642.
Losier, G. F., & Vallerand, R. J. (1994). The temporal relationship between perceived competence
and self-determined motivation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 793–801.
Louv, R. (2006). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill,
NC: Algonquin Books.
Luft, J. (2007). Minding the gap: Needed research on beginning/newly qualified science teachers.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 532–537.
Malone, K., & Tranter, P. J. (2003). School grounds as sites for learning: Making the most of
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

environmental opportunities. Environmental Education Research, 9, 283–303.

McGuinness, C. (1999). From thinking skills to thinking classrooms: A review and evaluation of
approaches for developing pupils’ thinking (DfEE Research Rep. No. RR115). London: DfEE.
McKendrick, J. H., Bradford, M. G., & Fielder, A. V. (2000). Time for a party! Making sense of
the commercialisation of leisure space for children. In S. Holloway & G. Valentine (Eds.),
Children’s geography: Living, playing, learning (pp. 100–118). London: Routledge.
McLeish, E. (Ed.) (1997). Educating for life: Guidelines for biodiversity education. Reading: Council
for Environmental Education.
Meinhold, J. L., & Malkus, A. J. (2005). Adolescent environmental behaviours: Can knowledge,
attitudes and self-efficacy make a difference? Environment and Behaviour, 37, 511–532.
Menzel, S., & Bögeholz, S. (2008). The loss of biodiversity as a challenge for sustainable develop-
ment: How do pupils in Chile and Germany perceive resource dilemmas? Research in Science
Education. Retrieved March 1, 2009, from http://www.springerlink.com/content/652t0w
3650h4283j/fulltext.pdf.
Metz, K. E. (2004). Children’s understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of
uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 219–290.
Michail, S., Stamou, A. G., & Stamou, G. P. (2007). Greek primary school teachers’ understand-
ing of current environmental issues: An exploration of their environmental knowledge and
images of nature. Science Education, 91, 244–259.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Current state and trends. London: Island Press.
Moseley, C., Reinke, K., & Bookout, V. (2002). The effect of teaching outdoor environmental
education on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. The
Journal of Environmental Education, 34, 9–15.
Novacek, M. J. (2008). Engaging the public in biodiversity issues. PNAS, 105(Suppl. 1),
11571–11578.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66,
543–578.
Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. J. (1994). Confidence and competence in writing: The role of self-
efficacy, outcome expectancy, and apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 28,
316–334.
Palmberg, I. E., & Kuru, J. (2000). Outdoor activities as a basis for environmental responsibility.
The Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 32–36.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications
(2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall.
Powers, A. (2004). Teacher preparation for environmental education: Faculty perspectives on the
infusion of environmental education into pre-service methods courses. The Journal of Environ-
mental Education, 35, 3–11.
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2271

Prezza, M., Alparone, F. R., Cristallo, C., & Secchiano, L. (2005). Parental perception of social
risk and of positive potentiality of outdoor autonomy for children: The development of two
instruments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 437–453.
Robertson, M. (2006). Childhood, peer culture and environmental learning. In J. C.-K. Lee & M.
Williams (Eds.), Environmental and geographical education for sustainability: Cultural contexts
(pp. 51–63). New York: Nova Publishers.
Saunders, C. D. (2003). The emerging field of conservation psychology. Human Ecology Review,
10, 137–149.
Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and classroom learning. Psychology in the Schools, 22, 208–223.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm
theory of support for social movements: The case of environmental concern. Human Ecology
Review, 6, 81–97.
Thomas, G., & Thompson, G. (2004). A child’s place: Why environment matters to children. London:
Green Alliance/DEMOS.
Trombulak, S. C., Omland, K. S., Robinson, J. A., Lusk, J. J., Fleischner, T. L., & Domroese, M.
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

(2004). Principles of conservation biology: Recommended guidelines for conservation literacy

from the Education Committee of the Society for Conservation Biology. Conservation Biology,
18, 1180–1190.
Turner-Erfort, G. (1997). Public awareness and perceptions of biodiversity. Transactions of the
Illinois State Academy of Science, 90, 113–121.
UNEP/CBD/COP/8/14 (2006, March 20–31). Global initiative on communication, education and
public awareness. Paper presented at the 8th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity, Curibita, Brazil.
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). (2005). UN decade
of education for sustainable development 2005–2014: The DESD at a glance. Paris: UNESCO.
Valentine, G., & McKendrick, J. (1997). Children’s outdoor play: Exploring parental concern
about children’s safety and the changing of nature of childhood. Geoforum, 28, 219–235.
Van Weelie, D., & Wals, A. (2002). Making biodiversity meaningful through environmental
education. International Journal of Science Teaching, 24, 1143–1156.
Vié, J.-C., Hilton-Taylor, C., Pollock, C., Ragle, J., Smart, J., Stuart, S. N., & Tong, R. (2008).
The IUCN Red List: A key conservation tool. In J.-C. Vié, C. Hilton-Taylor, & S. N. Stuart
(Eds.), The 2008 review of the IUCN red list of threatened species (Section 2, pp. 1–16).
Switzerland: IUCN Gland.
Ward Thompson, C., Aspinall, P., Bell, S., Findlay, C., Wherrett, J., & Travlou, P. (2004). Open
space and social inclusion: Local woodland use in Central Scotland. Edinburgh: Forestry
Commission.
Wilson, E. O. (1988). Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
 2272 P. Lindemann-Matthies et al.

Appendix. Questionnaire for preservice teachers

Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013
 Preservice Teachers and Biodiversity Education 2273
Downloaded by [University of Cyprus] at 06:15 11 June 2013

View publication stats