This article was downloaded by: [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign]

On: 18 September 2013, At: 20:35

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Journal of Environmental Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjee20

Environmental Literacy in Teacher Training:

Attitudes, Knowledge, and Environmental
Behavior of Beginning Students
a a a
Sara Pe'er , Daphne Goldman & Bela Yavetz
a
Nature and Science Department, Oranim College of Education, Israel
b
Department of Environmental Science and Agriculture, Beit Berl Academic
College, Israel
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Sara Pe'er , Daphne Goldman & Bela Yavetz (2007) Environmental Literacy in Teacher
Training: Attitudes, Knowledge, and Environmental Behavior of Beginning Students, The Journal of
Environmental Education, 39:1, 45-59, DOI: 10.3200/JOEE.39.1.45-59

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.39.1.45-59

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are
the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever
caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

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. Terms & Conditions of access and use can
be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 REPORTS & RESEARCH
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

Environmental Literacy in Teacher

Training: Attitudes, Knowledge, and
Environmental Behavior of Beginning
Students
Sara Pe’er, Daphne Goldman, and Bela Yavetz

ABSTRACT: The authors report the environmental attitudes and knowledge of 765 1st-year stu-
dents in 3 teacher-training colleges in Israel and examine the relationship between these variables
and background factors and their relationship to environmental behavior. Although the students’
environmental knowledge was limited, their overall attitudes toward the environment were positive.
The authors found a positive relationship between the environmental knowledge and environmental
attitudes of the students and the level of their mothers’ education. Students majoring in fields related
to the environment were more knowledgeable and had more environment-oriented attitudes in com-
parison with other students. The authors discuss the relationship between knowledge, attitudes, and
behavior and the influence of background factors on the students’ environmental literacy.

KEYWORDS: environmental attitudes, environmental behavior, environmental knowledge, environ-

mental literacy, teacher training

I n Israel, in recent years an increase in the number of schools integrating environmental education
into their K–12 curricula has paralleled the increase in awareness and recognition that environmental
quality is crucial to quality of life. Although environmental studies are not mandatory in the national
educational curriculum, educators have integrated environmental subject matter into curricula for more

Sara Pe’er, PhD, is the head of the Nature and Science Department at Oranim College of Education,
Israel. Her research focus is on environmental literacy in teacher training. Daphne Goldman, PhD, is the
head of the Department of Environmental Science and Agriculture at Beit Berl Academic College, Israel.
She is currently spearheading an environmental literacy center in the college; her fields of research include
environmental literacy in teacher training and interdisciplinary research on the oasis effect in arid envi-
ronments. Bela Yavetz, PhD, is the head of the Biology and Chemistry Department at Kibbutzim College
of Education, Israel. Her current research focuses on environmental literacy in teacher training and high
school students. Copyright © 2008 Heldref Publications

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 45

 than 20 years. The increase of environmental education within the educational system has highlighted the
lack of teachers adequately trained to effectively implement environmental education. Despite recognizing
the need to prepare effective environmental educators, few researchers in Israel are addressing questions
relevant to the preparation of teachers. To date, no researcher has undertaken a comprehensive study that
focuses on environmental education in teacher-training programs. Academic colleges of education in
Israel prepare teachers and educators for preschool through 10th grade (out of K–12). One prerequisite
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

for designing teacher-preparation programs that create environmentally literate graduates would be to
understand the environmental literacy of teacher-training students at different stages in their studies.
This article is part of a study aimed at characterizing the environmental literacy of Israeli teacher-
training students at the onset of their studies. We report the environmental knowledge and attitudes
of beginning students, the relationship of those factors to background factors, and the relationship
between environmental knowledge and attitudes and the environmental behavior described by
Goldman, Yavetz, and Pe’er (2006). Characterizing the environmental literacy of beginning students
is the first stage of a longitudinal research project focusing on environmental literacy instruction in
academic teacher-training programs in Israel.

Theoretical Framework
The environmental literacy variables that we investigated in this study originated in two bodies of
literature. The focus of theoretical literature is the definition of environmental literacy, its attributes,
the variables that environmental education aspires to develop, and the relationship between those
factors. The focus of the applied literature is developing and implementing instruments to measure
the variables of environmental literacy in different populations and the changes occurring in those
variables over time, with and without exposure to environmental education.
Individuals’ environmental behaviors reflect their environmental literacy. Hence, developing envi-
ronmental literacy is equivalent to developing responsible environmental behavior, and individuals’
behaviors reflect the level of their environmental literacy (Roth, 1992; Wilke, 1995). According to
Sia, Hungerford, and Tomera (1986), responsible environmental behavior is a learned action that
does not develop in a vacuum but in response to interacting components. One component is the cog-
nitive strand—environmental knowledge, including understanding (a) the ecological principles and
processes basic to comprehending the effect of humans on natural systems, (b) the interrelationship
between social systems and natural systems and the environmental issues arising from these complex
interactions, and (c) strategies of environmental action, including the ability to identify and criti-
cally evaluate alternatives for remediation (Hines, Hungerford, & Tomera 1986/7; Morrone, Mancl,
& Carr, 2001; Roth; Sia et al.; United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
[UNESCO]–United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP], 1978).
Although the relationship between cognitive components, affective components, and behavior is
complex and not necessarily linear, researchers have shown that increasing an individual’s environ-
mental knowledge via environmental study results in more positive attitudes toward the environment
(Bradley, Waliczek, & Zajicek, 1999; McMillan, Wright, & Beazley, 2004) and more responsible
environmental behavior (Hsu, 2004). Knowledge is a critical component of environmental literacy,
but it alone is not a sufficient precursor for responsible environmental behavior (Hungerford &
Volk, 1990). The affective strand, concerned with the attitudes and values necessary to motivate the
transformation of knowledge into responsible environmental behavior, is an important component
for developing an environmentally literate citizenry.
The literature contains several approaches to defining what constitutes environmental attitudes.
Psychosocial variables—including attitudes, personal responsibility, and locus of control—were one

46 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 major category that emerged (Hines et al., 1986/7). Attitudes apply to general feelings toward ecol-
ogy and the environment, feelings and concern for specific environmental issues, and feelings toward
acting to remedy environmental problems. Personal responsibility represents the individual’s sense of
obligation toward the environment, either in general or to a specific aspect (e.g., reducing air pollu-
tion or recycling). Locus of control represents individuals’ perceptions of their ability to bring about
environmental change through personal behavior. Someone who attributes change to external fac-
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

tors, not to personal behavior (external locus of control), will be less inclined to influence a situation.
Internal locus of control describes people who believe in their ability to bring about change through
personal actions (Hungerford & Volk, 1990; Peyton & Miller, 1980). One purpose in developing
environmental literacy is to empower people with a belief in their ability to contribute to environ-
mental solutions through personal behavior, either as an individual or part of a group.
One of the scales developed to measure environmental attitudes, as conceptualized by social scientists,
is the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Scale, developed by Dunlap and Van Liere (1978) and
later revised as the New Ecological Paradigm Scale to address contemporary issues in the environmental
debate (Cordano, Welcomer, & Scherer, 2003; Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000; La Trobe &
Acott, 2000). This scale provides a tool for evaluating an individual’s environmental orientation. The
rationale behind the NEP Scale was the emergence in Western society of a more ecological perspective
toward nature and human–environment relationships, incorporating ethics and values concerning the
human–environment relationships (i.e., value of nature). The NEP represents an ecocentric (proenviron-
mental) worldview that recognizes the intrinsic value of nature (i.e., antianthropocentrism), the fragility
of nature’s balance, limits to economic growth, and the possibility of ecological crisis. This worldview
represents a paradigm shift from the prevalent Western anthropocentric mode of thought (dominant social
paradigm [DSP]), which reflects a belief in human exemption from laws of nature and perceives nature as
an unlimited resource existing for human exploitation, valuable only for its ability to fulfill human needs.
Evaluating environmental attitudes should incorporate assessing an individual’s environmental orientation
on a continuum whose opposite ends are the NEP and DSP worldviews. Such a procedure would enable
researchers to track whether values and attitudes toward nature are changing over time and to gauge the
contribution of environmental education to changing environmental attitudes.

Method

Participants

We conducted our study in the fall of 2003 with a heterogeneous group of 765 1st-year teacher-
training students from three large colleges in Israel. The colleges, located in different regions of the
country, have 4-year programs from which students graduate with degrees of bachelor in education
and with teaching certificates. The academic program has two parts: (a) studies in one or two major
disciplines and (b) studies in education and pedagogy.

Instrument
Researchers should adapt instruments for measuring environmental literacy to the target popula-
tion in terms of age, socioeconomic background, institutional framework, the national environmen-
tal priorities as reflected in the environmental issues to which the media exposes the public, and the
environmental subjects integrated into the education curriculum (Leeming, Dwyer, & Bracken,
1995; Schindler, 1999).
The lack of suitable research tools to use with our target population required us to develop a
questionnaire to investigate environmental knowledge and attitudes of students in teacher-training

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 47

 colleges in Israel.1 To ensure that the results reflected the respondents’ knowledge and attitudes before
exposure to academic content, we administered the questionnaire during the 1st month of their 1st
academic year. The questionnaire had five section.

Background. The questionnaire included questions about a student’s major academic discipline, age,
gender, ethnic background, and parents’ level of education. The question about major academic
discipline divided the students into two groups: (a) those studying environment-affiliated fields,
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

such as environmental science, agriculture, geography, land-of-Israel studies, and life sciences and (b)
those studying nonenvironment-affiliated fields, such as social studies, history, literature, mathemat-
ics, arts, or physical education. The choices for parents’ level of education were high school or less,
undergraduate (including postsecondary vocational and teacher education), and advanced degree.

Sources of information on environmental issues. In this section, we listed six sources of informa-
tion and asked the students to what degree each source contributed to their current knowledge about
environmental issues. Students were to rate the sources by using a 4-point, Likert-type scale ranging
from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much).

Ecological and environmental knowledge. The knowledge section included 23 multiple-choice

questions divided into four themes: (a) fundamental ecological principles and processes (7 ques-
tions), (b) global environmental issues (7 questions), (c) local environmental issues (4 questions),
and (d) strategies for environmental action (5 questions). We constructed the knowledge questions
in two groups—basic and advanced—according to level of knowledge evaluated. Cronbach’s alpha
reliability coefficients of basic and advanced questions were .52 and .54, respectively.

Attitudes. Because we planned to use the questionnaire with prospective teachers and because teach-
ers have a crucial role in advancing environmentally literate citizenry (World Commission on the
Environment and Development, 1987), we asked for views on the importance of incorporating
environmental education into the educational system. This area is not usually included in studies mea-
suring environmental attitudes, although other researchers have asked preservice students about the
importance of including sustainability topics in teacher preparation (Kyridis, Mavrikaki, Tsakiridou,
Daikopoulos, & Zigouri, 2005; Stir, 2006). As leaders of environmental change in schools, teachers
need to believe in their ability to promote environmental change so they can nurture that belief in their
students. Therefore, the attitude section included questions focusing on locus of control. Consistent
with the attitude variable described by Hines et al. (1986/7), we included questions aimed at evaluating
students’ attitudes toward a national resource management policy and the use of environmental legisla-
tion and law enforcement as tools for environmental management. Questions in these areas included
items compatible with the NEP Scale to distinguish between proenvironment and anthropocentric
values and attitudes. Questions concerning “value of the natural environment” were specific reflections
of the NEP measurement instrument and included items evaluating students’ perspective on the value
of nonhuman components of nature and the human–environment interrelationship.
We divided the attitude section into five categories, each containing four or five statements on which
we asked the students to express their opinions by using a 5-point, Likert-type scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The categories were (a) the importance of incorporating environ-
mental education in the educational system (α = .73), (b) priorities for national resource management
policy (α = .67), (c) the use of environmental legislation and enforcement as a tool for environmental
management (α= .52), (d) the locus of control (α = .59), and (e) the value of the natural environment
(human–environment interrelationship; α = .67). For the overall attitude inventory, α = .81.

48 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 Behavior. We assessed environmental behavior by asking students to state the extent to which they car-
ried out 20 environment-related activities using a 5-point, Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5
(almost always).

Data Analysis
We used SPSS version 12 for descriptive statistics and data analysis as follows: (a) Pearson correla-
tions to determine relationships among environmental attitude categories, between the two levels
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

of environmental knowledge, and between environmental attitudes, knowledge, and behavior; (b)
analysis of variance techniques (one-way analysis of variance [ANOVA] and Scheffe’s post hoc test) to
examine the relationships between mothers’ education and environmental literacy variables; and (c)
t tests to examine differences in environmental literacy variables between students in environment-
affiliated fields and students in nonenvironment-affiliated fields.

Results
Background Data
The average age of incoming students was 24.2 ± 3.53 years, and the majority (90%) of students
were women. The parents of these students had similar levels of education: 64% of fathers and 61%
of mothers had a high school education or less; 26% of the fathers and 29% of the mothers had a
bachelor’s degree or postsecondary vocational certificate, and 10% of each parent had an advanced
degree. Because the distribution of the three levels of education was similar for both parents, we used
only the mothers for studying the influence of parents’ education on students’ responses. Only 15%
of students chose environment-related fields as their major discipline.

Environmental Knowledge
Beginning students had low ecological and environmental knowledge (see Table 1). Even their basic
knowledge of subjects with which high school graduates should be familiar was limited, although
their scores on those questions were higher than were their scores on the advanced questions.
We found a significant correlation between the students’ scores for basic and advanced environ-
mental knowledge (r = .592, N = 765, p < .01). Students were most knowledgeable in fundamental
ecological processes and concepts, although their knowledge was poor. They were least knowledge-
able about environmental action strategies (see Table 2).

Sources of Information on Environmental Topics

Television was the students’ major source of information; the internet was only a minor source for
environmental information (see Table 3).

TABLE 1. Students’ Environmental Knowledge: Mean Combined Score and Mean

Scores for Parts of Questionnaire

Part of questionnaire M SD

Basic (9 questions) 48.26 22.30

Advanced (14 questions) 31.96 19.23
Both parts 38.39 18.24

Note. Maximum score = 100.

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 49

 Environmental Attitudes
Table 4 contains the scores for each of the five environmental attitudes categories and the overall
attitude score. The high scores (3.59–4.13 out of 5) indicated that most of the students expressed
positive attitudes in all the categories investigated. The highest score was for importance of environ-
mental education, whereas resource management policy received the lowest score. Most students
expressed a strong sense of being able to have a positive influence on the environment through their
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

personal behavior and actions, indicative of an internal locus of control.

TABLE 2. Student Scores on Themes of Environmental Knowledge

Theme M SD

Fundamental ecological processes and concepts 44.67 10.70

Global environmental issues 37.40 10.42
Local environmental issues 37.10 16.69
Environmental action strategies 32.00 16.20

Note. Maximum score = 100.

TABLE 3. Student Ratings of Information Sources as Contributors to Their Knowledge

of Environmental Topics

Information source M SD

Television 3.35 0.73

Daily newspapers 2.90 0.78
Educational system 2.79 0.83
Periodicals 2.58 0.83
Radio 2.56 0.90
Internet 2.36 1.01

Note. Rating choices were a 4-point, Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4 (very much).

TABLE 4. Student Scores for Categories of Environmental Attitudes

Category M SD

Importance of environmental education in educational system 4.13 0.56

Value of natural environment 3.86 0.62
Priorities for national resource-management policy 3.59 0.69
Environmental legislation and law enforcement 3.95 0.61
Locus of control 4.09 0.49
All environmental attitude items 3.95 0.39

Note. Students scored items using a 5-point, Likert-type scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

50 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 The correlation coefficients between all attitude categories were positive and statistically significant
(p < .01), although the significance between categories varied. We found the highest correlation
between value of the natural environment and locus of control. Relatively high correlations existed
between value of the natural environment and resource management policy and between importance
of environmental education and resource management policy and locus of control (see Table 5).
Following Hinkle, Wiersma, and Jurs (1988), we used the value of .3 to determine the extent of
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

the relationships between the variables.

Relationship Between Environmental Knowledge and Attitudes and Background Factors

Mothers’ level of education. We found a significant positive relationship between the students’ envi-
ronmental knowledge and the level of their mothers’ education (see Table 6). Scheffe’s post hoc test
indicated that the source of difference in student scores was between students whose mother obtained
a high school education or less and students whose mothers obtained a college education.
Our results also demonstrated a positive trend between students’ attitudes and the extent of their moth-
ers’ education. This trend was not statistically significant for the categories importance of environmental

TABLE 5. Correlations Between Environmental Attitude Categories

Category 1 2 3 4 5

1. Importance of environmental education

in educational system —
2. Value of natural environment .308** —
3. Priorities for national resource-management
policy .374** .381** —
4. Environmental legislation and law
enforcement .278** .300** .213** —
5. Locus of control .365** .466** .276** .295** —

**
Difference is significant at the .01 level.

TABLE 6. Relationship Between Students’ Environmental Knowledge and Their

Mothers’ Levels of Education

Question level Education n M SD F df p

Basic High school 452 45.87 21.24 8.263 2, 744 .000

Undergraduate 216 52.52 23.88
Advanced degree 77 52.81 21.57
Advanced High school 452 30.36 18.30 5.045 2, 744 .007
Undergraduate 216 34.52 21.17
Advanced degree 77 35.81 18.01
Overall High school 452 36.43 17.25 7.905 2, 744 .000
knowledge Undergraduate 216 41.57 20.03
score Advanced degree 77 42.46 17.27

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 51

 education and use of environmental legislation and enforcement, but it was statistically significant for the
other categories and the overall mean of attitudes items (see Table 7). Scheffe’s post hoc test indicated that
for resource management policy, the difference in scores was between students whose mothers achieved
up to a high school education and students whose mothers obtained an advanced degree. For value of the
natural environment and locus of action, the difference was between students whose mother achieved up
to a high school education and students whose mothers obtained a college education. With respect to the
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

overall score of attitudes, the difference between all groups was significant.

Students’ choice of disciplinary major. The data in Table 8 reveal that students enrolled in environment-
affiliated disciplines demonstrated a significantly higher level of environmental knowledge in comparison
with students in nonenvironment-affiliated fields. However, the students in environment-affiliated fields
did not demonstrate the level of basic knowledge expected from graduates of secondary schools. Students in
environment-affiliated fields scored higher in all attitude categories than did the nonenvironment-affiliated
students, and the differences were significant for importance of environmental education, value of the natural
environment, resource management policy, and the overall mean for attitude items (see Table 9).

Correlation Between Environmental Literacy Variables: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behavior

Table 10 is a summary of the combined scores for the environmental variables that we measured
in this study. The score for environmental attitudes was higher than was the score for environmental

TABLE 7. Relationship Between Students’ Environmental Attitudes and Their

Mothers’ Level of Education

Attitude category Mother’s education n M SD F df p

Importance of EE High school 450 4.10 0.55 2.627 2, 739 .073

in educational Undergraduate 214 4.14 0.57
system Advanced degrees 76 4.26 0.56
Value of natural High school 446 3.78 0.66 12.557 2, 732 .000
environment Undergraduate 211 3.96 0.52
Advanced degrees 76 4.11 0.51
Priorities for High school 447 3.54 0.70 3.767 2, 732 .02
national resource- Undergraduate 211 3.61 0.67
management Advanced degrees 75 3.78 0.72
policy
Environmental High school 49 3.92 0.63 1.980 2, 736 .139
legislation and Undergraduate 212 3.98 0.60
law enforcement Advanced degrees 76 4.05 0.49
Locus of control High school 451 4.06 0.48 4.434 2, 738 .012
Undergraduate 212 4.16 0.49
Advanced degrees 76 4.18 0.48
Overall attitude High school 452 3.86 0.37 8.109 2, 739 .000
score Undergraduate 214 3.93 0.35
Advanced degrees 76 4.01 0.35

Note. EE = environmental education.

52 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 TABLE 8. Environmental Knowledge: Comparing Students Majoring in Environment-
Affiliated Fields (EAF) and Students Majoring in Nonenvironment-Affiliated Fields
(NAF)

Level of question Major n M SD t df p

Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

Basic EAF 111 64.06 24.57 8.416 756 .000

NAF 656 45.66 20.70
Advanced EAF 111 49.87 22.13 11.468 765 .000
NAF 656 28.97 16.91
Combined EAF 111 55.42 21.55 11.521 765 .000
NAF 656 35.51 15.92

TABLE 9. Environmental Attitudes: Comparing Students Majoring in Environment-

Affiliated Fields (EAF) and Students Majoring in Nonenvironment-Affiliated Fields
(NAF)

Environmental attitude category Major n M SD t df p

Importance of EE in educational EAF 109 4.29 0.51 3.423 760 .001

system NAF 653 4.10 0.56
Value of natural environment EAF 106 4.10 0.54 4.217 753 .000
NAF 649 3.83 0.63
Priorities for national resource- EAF 107 3.95 0.70 5.998 753 .000
management policy NAF 648 3.53 0.68
Environmental legislation and law EAF 109 4.04 0.57 1.662 755 .097
enforcement NAF 650 3.94 0.62
Locus of control EAF 109 4.14 0.47 1.113 759 .266
NAF 652 4.08 0.5
Combined categories EAF 110 4.04 0.35 4.52 732 .000
NAF 654 3.87 0.36

Note. EE = environmental education.

behavior. Pearson correlation coefficients between all the environmental literacy variables were sta-
tistically significant (p < .01). The highest correlation that we measured was between attitudes and
behavior, and the lowest correlation was between knowledge and behavior (see Table 11).

Discussion
Environmental Attitudes and Knowledge of Beginning Students
The high combined score for all the attitude items and the scores for each attitude category indi-
cate that beginning students possess proenvironment values and attitudes (see Table 4). We hypoth-
esized that beginning students would demonstrate less environment-supportive values and attitudes.

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 53

 TABLE 10. Environmental Behavior, Attitudes, and Knowledge: Students’ Mean
Scores for Combined Categories of Variables

Variable M SD

Behaviora 3.19 0.50

Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

Attitudesa 3.95 0.40

Knowledgeb 38.38 18.24

a
Scoring for behavior and attitudes was on a scale of 1–5. bMaximum knowledge score was 100.

TABLE 11. Correlations Between Students’ Combined Scores for Environmental

Behavior, Attitudes, and Knowledge

Variable Behavior Attitudes Knowledge

Behavior —
Attitudes .490 —
Knowledge .233 .328 —

Note. All correlations are significant at the .01 level.

Researchers have reported a discrepancy between expected environmental attitudes and those that
respondents demonstrated. Dunlap and Van Liere (1978) found that endorsement of NEP values by
the general public was higher than expected.
What may explain the proenvironment attitudes demonstrated by beginning students? One possi-
bility is that the attitudes of Israeli society toward environmental issues are changing. Issues pertaining
to environmental quality are continuously gaining status in the national agenda and receiving more
media exposure. Hence, the general public may be more aware of the existence of environmental
problems and their implications for the quality of life. Integration of environmental subjects in the
school curriculum may also contribute to increasing awareness of the environmental crisis. If the
students’ proenvironment attitudes stem from increased exposure to environmental issues, we would
expect a reasonable level of basic knowledge to accompany the attitudes. On the contrary, the students
demonstrated an extremely low level of environmental knowledge. Researchers have reported similar
findings of limited environmental knowledge paralleling positive environmental attitudes in studies
of elementary school children (Dimopoulos & Pantis, 2003), secondary school students (Hausebeck,
Milbrath, & Enright, 1992; Kuhlemeier, Bergh, & Lagerweij, 1999), college and university students
(Shean & Shei, 1995), and teachers (Aini, Fakhru’l-Razi, Laily, & Jariah, 2003). One explanation for
the gap between knowledge and attitudes may be normative influences, or, expressed attitudes reflect-
ing not true values but the influence of social desirability (La Trobe & Acott, 2000; Newhouse, 1991;
Schindler, 1999). An alternative interpretation of this discrepancy is that the students, in spite of their
proenvironment attitudes, do not fully comprehend the underlying ecological and environmental
concepts related to environmental issues or appreciate the implications of a proenvironment approach
on lifestyles at a personal or societal level. The relatively low correlation that we found between stu-
dents’ attitudes and knowledge (see Table 11) may support the idea that environmental knowledge

54 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 is not a necessary prerequisite for proenvironment attitudes. Other researchers have raised this issue
of the relationship between concern for the environment and understanding of environmental issues
(Aini et al.; Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978). This disconnect has implications for developing respon-
sible environmental behavior, the ultimate goal of environmental education. When environmentally
supportive attitudes are not based on a fundamental understanding of the ecological principles and
environmental issues that arise from the complex human–environment interrelationship, researchers
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

expect the ability to address environmental problems to be limited. Our finding that the knowledge
category in which beginning students were least proficient was environmental action strategies sup-
ports this hypothesis (see Table 2).
What other explanations exist for the beginning students’ positive attitudes? Their attitudes
may reflect the initial enthusiasm characterizing a person at the onset of a new direction. Gilat,
Kupferberg, and Sagi (2006) supported this idea by demonstrating that attitudes of teacher-training
students toward the teaching profession were most positive in their 1st year of studies. The atti-
tudes demonstrated by the students in our study may reflect their desire to identify with what they
intuitively accept as correct values. This is plausible considering that we conducted our study with a
population oriented toward a values-laden profession such as education.
Comparing the results of the different attitude categories may contribute to elucidating the
students’ attitudes. The category that students were most supportive of was importance of envi-
ronmental education, as we could expect from teacher-training students. Pedagogical students in
other countries also have perceived that their preparation for teaching should include environmental
subjects (Kyridis et al., 2005; Stir, 2006). The students in our study demonstrated a strong tendency
toward an internal locus of control, an aspect of inclination to influence, another characteristic that
we would expect of individuals oriented toward teaching. The category for which the students dem-
onstrated the least environment-supportive attitudes was resource management policy. This category
included these statements: “Israel should encourage development of renewable energy resources even
if this results in an increase in consumer price of electricity” and “Industry should be forced to reduce
pollution even if this results in an increase in price of consumer products.” These are situations in
which an individual needs to trade off between economic benefit and environmental protection.
Furthermore, these are not general statements about environmental protection directed toward soci-
ety at large, but ones with clear economic implications at a personal level. Hence, they challenge stu-
dents with dilemmas that are true tests of their values. A high score for these items indicates concep-
tual awareness of the way that human behavior affects the environment, meaning that the respondent
understands that resources are limited, comprehends the personal implications of conserving limited
resources, and is willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary to save resources. As expected, the
students’ attitudes in this category were most conservative (i.e., low score). The relatively high cor-
relation that we found between resource management policy and value of natural environment (see
Table 5) also supports the previous idea: Although we inserted aspects reflecting the NEP into most
of the attitude categories, the category value of natural environment included items that specifically
evaluated the students’ fundamental values regarding nonhuman components of nature and thus
helped to distinguish between students oriented toward an anthropocentric worldview (DSP) and
those oriented toward an ecocentric worldview (NEP). Value of natural environment and resource
management policy complement each other in evaluating orientation on the environmental attitude
continuum, the opposite ends of which are NEP and DSP. The relatively high correlation between
these categories indicates that students who place high intrinsic value on nature also support social
and personal sacrifice necessary for conservation of natural resources, and vise versa. Furthermore, as
support for the complementary nature of value of natural environment and resource management
policy, we found that the lowest correlation was between resource management policy and environ-

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 55

 mental legislation and enforcement as a tool for environmental management. The latter category
included general statements such as “Laws reduce damage to the environment” and “Industry should
be penalized for environmental damage.” The respondents might have found it easier to accept gen-
eral environmental action strategies directed toward society at large that did not test their basic values
by personal sacrifice, in comparison with the statements that concerned resource management.

Influence of Background Factors

Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

We investigated whether students inclined toward environment-affiliated disciplines demonstrated

a higher level of environmental knowledge and more proenvironment attitudes in comparison with
students who chose nonenvironment-affiliated subjects. We found that students inclined toward
environment-affiliated studies (15% of the participants) displayed significantly more knowledge
than did the nonenvironment-affiliated students. This difference between the two groups may result
from exposure in high school to topics such as environmental science, biology, agriculture, or geog-
raphy, from personal interest in environmental topics, or from exposure to the subject in nonformal
frameworks such as youth groups. Similarly, Tikka, Kuitunen, and Tynys (2000) found that Finnish
college students majoring in biology exhibited the greatest level of knowledge in comparison with
students majoring in other subjects.
We would expect students in environment-affiliated fields to demonstrate significantly more pro-
environment attitudes than would other students. The results of our study supported this hypothesis:
Students in environment-affiliated fields scored significantly higher in the categories value of natural
environment, resource management policy, importance of environmental education, and the com-
bined mean for attitudes, thus demonstrating a more proenvironment orientation in comparison
with the other students. Other studies conducted with college students support the results of our
study. In Australia, Hodgkinson and Innes (2001) found that 1st-year biology, environmental stud-
ies, and sociology students were most proenvironment; students majoring in law, commerce, and
computer studies demonstrated the least proenvironment attitudes. Tikka et al. (2000) reported that
Finnish biology majors had the most positive environmental attitudes, whereas students of technol-
ogy- and economics-related majors were the most negatively oriented.
We used parents’ education as an indicator of socioeconomic status. Our study revealed a sig-
nificant positive relationship between mothers’ levels of education and the beginning students’
environmental knowledge and attitudes. Other studies in Israel have reported a positive relationship
between parents’ education and factors such as level of income, extent of employment, and children’s
achievements in the educational system (Ben David, 2003; Zuzovsky, 2001). Our study contributes
the additional factor of a relationship between level of parents’ education and their offsprings’ envi-
ronmental literacy.
Dunlap and Van Liere (1978) raised the possibility that better educated individuals subscribe
more to the NEP as a result of greater exposure to ecological ideas through education, mass media,
and personal interest. On the basis of that idea, we would expect that students who grew up in
more educated families would display more proenvironment attitudes. We found support for that
assumption in the combined mean of attitude items and in the scores for the categories value of
nature and resource management, which most specifically differentiated between NEP-oriented and
DSP-oriented students.

Environmental Literacy of Beginning Students: The Relationships Between Knowledge, Attitudes, and
Responsible Environmental Behavior
Overall, the students displayed positive attitudes toward the environment. Their environmental
knowledge, however, was limited, and their personal behavior reflected only a moderate commitment

56 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 to the environment (see Table 10). In another study involving the same participants, we presented
an in-depth analysis of students’ environmental behavior on the basis of behavioral categories repre-
senting different levels of environmental commitment (Goldman et al., 2006). In the results of that
study, we reported that the higher the commitment level, the lower the score for behavior. This nega-
tive relationship between the frequency at which students performed different categories of behavior
and the level of their environmental commitment, represented by the corresponding categories of
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

behavior, further supports our conclusion that beginning students do not translate their proenviron-
ment attitudes into responsible environmental behavior. Dunlap and Van Liere (1978) raised the
same issue of discrepancy between environmental attitudes and environmental behavior that we
found and cautioned against drawing overly optimistic conclusions that endorsement of NEP items
by the public would actually become a commitment of the public to responsible environmental
behavior. One explanation for the finding that proenvironment student attitudes do not translate
into responsible environmental behavior is that the students do not possess sufficient knowledge
about the environmental consequences of their behavior. We may expect individuals whose positive
environmental attitudes are unsupported by knowledge to be less inclined to take environmental
aspects into account in daily living and less willing to make sacrifices in personal behavior and
demonstrate responsible behavior, especially if the behavior conflicts with economic considerations
or entails special effort. Our findings of relatively low correlations between knowledge and attitudes
and between knowledge and behavior is in line with this idea and demonstrates that the beginning
students’ environment-oriented attitudes were not necessarily associated with greater knowledge.
Results obtained by Kuhlemeier et al. (1999) with secondary-level students support the importance
of environmental knowledge to environment-friendly behavior. From the meta-analysis by Hines
et al. (1986/7), it also appears that knowledge is a prerequisite to action, and this knowledge must
include action strategies.
Attitudes are one of the most important, but controversial, influences on behavior. The rela-
tively high positive correlation between students’ environmental attitudes and overall environmental
behavior (see Table 11) and the limited student practice of responsible environmental behavior (see
Table 10) supports that conclusion. Alternatively, normative influences may have affected students’
responses to the questionnaire, leading to more positive and outspoken attitudes relative to their true
feelings and resulting in an apparent attitude–behavior discrepancy (Newhouse, 1991).
Although for more than 30 years, Israeli educators have incorporated environmental content into
the formal educational curriculum (Blum, 2006; Goldman et al., 2006), our study indicates that the
environmental literacy of high school graduates who chose to study in teacher-training programs was
low. Two interrelated situations may have caused this problem. First, existing teachers may not be
effectively teaching environmental education (Cutter & Smith, 2001; Mckeown-Ice, 2000; Spork,
1992). Second, despite the increased popularity of environmental content in schools, environmental
studies are not mandatory in the K–12 curricula. Therefore, the majority of pupils are not receiv-
ing the long-term, continuous, methodical exposure to the subject that is necessary for developing
substantial environmental literacy (Goldman et al., 2003). Our finding that television, not the edu-
cational system, was a major source of information on the environment for students (see Table 3)
supports that conclusion. Other researchers have reported similar findings for school children (Blum,
1985) and for teachers (Aini et al., 2003).
Israel represents a unique demographic situation: The country has the high rate of population
growth that is typical of developing countries and the lifestyles, consumption patterns, and economic
and industrial development that is characteristic of the developed world. Consequently, Israel faces
sizeable challenges regarding sustainable development, making environmental education especially
critical as a tool for achieving sustainable development. Instilling environmental literacy in future

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 57

 generations requires educators who are equipped with knowledge, skills, and commitment. The
results of our study emphasize the gap between the environmental challenges confronting Israeli soci-
ety and the competence in environmental literacy of graduates of the secondary educational system
who chose to train as educators. Narrowing this gap is one challenge of preservice teacher-training
programs. The design of the preservice programs should take into account the characteristics of the
student population, which are the outcome of their social, cultural, and physical environments, and
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

include all the necessary components for adequately preparing future educators to effectively address
the environmental education of their future students.

NOTE
1. For information on the process of instrument development, including content validation and reliability check, see
Goldman et al. (2006).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was supported by the MOFET Institute, Kibbutzim College of Education, Oranim College of Education,
andBeit Berl Academic College. The authors extend their gratitude to the Unit for Research and Evaluation of Beit Berl
College and especially to Mrs. Tali Zeiger, for assistance in conducting this study.

REFERENCES
Aini, M. S., Fakhru’l-Razi, A., Laily, H. P., & Jariah, M. (2003). Environmental concerns, knowledge and practices gap
among Malaysian teachers. Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4, 305–313.
Ben David, D. (2003). Israel’s long-run socioeconomic trajectories. Economic Quarterly, March, 27–46. (in Hebrew).
Retrieved January 10, 2007, from http://spirit.tau.ac.il/public/bendavid/israel/socio-econ.
Blum, A. (1985). What do Israeli high school students know and believe about environmental issues? The Journal of
Environmental Education, 3, 338–348.
Blum, A. (2006). 35 years of curriculum developing for environmental quality in Israel: A reflective evaluation of oppor-
tunities taken and missed. Curriculum Development in Practice, 18, 5–30 (in Hebrew).
Bradley, J. C., Waliczek, T. M., & Zajicek, J. M. (1999). Relationship between environmental knowledge and environmen-
tal attitude of high school students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 30(3), 17–21.
Cordano, M., Welcomer, S. A., & Scherer, R. F. (2003). An analysis of the predictive validity of the New Ecological
Paradigm scale. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(3), 22–28.
Cutter, A., & Smith, R. (2001). Gauging primary school teachers’ environmental literacy: An issue of priority. Asia Pacific
Education Review, 2, 45–60.
Dimopoulos, D. I., & Pantis, J. D. (2003). Knowledge and attitudes regarding sea turtles in elementary students on
Zakynthos, Greece. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(3), 30–38.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The New Environmental Paradigm: A proposed measuring instrument and
preliminary results. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9(4), 10–19.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological
Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425–442.
Gilat, Y., Kupferberg, I., & Sagi, R., (2006). Self efficacy and perception of the teaching profession in eyes of students
during their training: A quantitative and qualitative point of view. Mahalachim 2006, 35–68 (in Hebrew).
Goldman, D., Shwartz, E., Peled, O., Dunetz, D., Chen, S., Gavrieli, Y., et al. (2003). Policy towards environmental
education in Israel: The place of environmental education and toward a new vision, Position paper, National Council for
Environmental Quality, Committee for Education and Community (in Hebrew).
Goldman, D., Yavetz, B., & Pe’er, S. (2006). Environmental literacy in teacher training in Israel: Environmental behavior
of new students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(1), 3–22.
Hausebeck, K. W., Milbrath, L. W., & Enright, S. M. (1992). Environmental knowledge, awareness and concern among
11th grade students: New York State. The Journal of Environmental Education, 24(1), 27–34.
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1986/7). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environ-
mental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8.
Hinkle, D. E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (1988). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Hodgkinson, S. P., & Innes, J. M. (2001). The attitudinal influence of career orientation in 1st-year university students:
Environmental attitudes as a function of degree choice. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3), 37–40.
Hsu, S. J. (2004). The effects of an environmental education program on responsible environmental behavior and associ-
ated environmental literacy variables in Taiwanese college students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 35(2),
37–48.
Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of
Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–21.

58 THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

 Kuhlemeier, H., Bergh, H. V. D., & Lagerweij, N. (1999). Environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior in Dutch
secondary education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 30(2), 4–14.
Kyridis, A., Mavrikaki, E., Tsakiridou, H., Daikopoulos, J., & Zigouri, H. (2005). An analysis of attitudes of pedagogical
students toward environmental education in Greece. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6(1),
54–64.
La Trobe, H. L., & Acott, T. G. (2000). A modified NEP/DSP environmental attitudes scale. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 32(1), 12–20.
Leeming, F. C., Dwyer, W. O., & Bracken, B. A. (1995). Children’s environmental attitude and knowledge scale:
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 20:35 18 September 2013

Construction and validation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 26(3), 22–31.

Mckeown-Ice, R. (2000). Environmental education in the United States: A survey of preservice teacher education pro-
grams. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 4–11.
McMillan, E. E., Wright, T., & Beazley, K. (2004). Impact of university-level environmental studies class on students’
values. The Journal of Environmental Education, 35(3), 19–28.
Morrone, M., Mancl, K., & Carr, K. (2001). Development of a metric to test group differences in ecological knowledge as
one component of environmental literacy. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 33–42.
Newhouse, N. (1991). Implication of attitude and behavior research for environmental conservation. The Journal of
Environmental Education, 22(1), 26–32.
Peyton, R. B., & Miller, B. A. (1980). Developing an internal locus of control as a prerequisite to environmental action
taking. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8.
Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s. Columbus, OH: ERIC
Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
Schindler, F. H. (1999). Development of the survey of environmental issue attitudes. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 30(3), 12–16.
Shean, G. D., & Shei, T. (1995). The values of student environmentalists. The Journal of Psychology, 129, 559–565.
Sia, A. P., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1986). Selected predictors of responsible environmental behavior: An
analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 17(2), 31–40.
Spork, H. (1992). Environmental education: A mismatch between theory and practice. Australian Journal of Environmental
Education, 8, 147–166.
Stir, J. (2006). Restructuring teacher education for sustainability: Student involvement through a “strengths model.”
Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(9–11), 830–836.
Tikka, P. M., Kuitunen, M. T., & Tynys, S. M. (2000). Effects of educational background on students’ attitudes, activity
levels, and knowledge concerning the environment. The Journal of Environmental Education, 31(3), 12–19.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)–United Nations Environment Programme
(UNP). (1978). The Tbilisi Declaration. Connect, 3(1), 1–8.
Wilke, R. (1995). Environmental literacy and the college curriculum. EPA Journal, 21(2), 28–30.
World Commission on the Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Zuzovsky, R. (2001). Learning outcomes and the educational context of mathematics and science teaching in Israel.
Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, Tel Aviv, Israel, 1999. Ramot Publications, Tel Aviv
University (in Hebrew).

FALL 2007, VOL. 39, NO. 1 59