A RESIDENTIAL OUTDOOR EDUCATION CAMP AND ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES: A CASE STUDY

Md Amin, M. T. (2004). A residential outdoor education camp and environmental attitudes: A case study. Unpublished Master Thesis, University of Otago, Otago, New Zealand.

i

A Residential Outdoor Education Camp and Environmental Attitudes: A Case Study

Md Amin bin Md Taff

School of Physical Education Te Kura Mahi-a-korikori Division of Sciences Te Rohe a Ahikaroa

University of Otago Te Whare Wananga o Otago PO BOX 56, DUNEDIN NEW ZEALAND


ii

ABSTRACT

Whilst many outdoor educators are confident their residential outdoor education

(ROE) camp programmes improve participants’ environmental attitudes, research findings

are inconclusive. This study seeks to explore the effects of a ROE camp and socio-

demographic variables (age, gender, number of siblings, environmental worldview, preferred

recreational activities, and previous outdoor and environmental education experiences) on

environmental attitudes. It also examines camp elements that may be influential upon

environmental attitudes and attempts to shed light upon the process of attitudinal change.

Twenty-eight intermediate school students (aged 11 – 13 years) participated in a four-

day ROE camp that included environmental education activities. A mixed method approach

was utilised where Mackay’s (1981) modified version of the Millward Ginter Outdoor Attitude

Inventory (MGOAI) was used to gather quantitative data from pre and post-tests. Qualitative

insights were also gathered using participant observation, interviews and a focus group with:

(1) three students; (2) the school’s Head of Outdoor Education and; (3) a parent volunteer.

Results from a repeated measure ANOVA and constant comparative qualitative

methods suggested that the camp led to a positive improvement in environmental attitudes.

Gender and previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities were

also found to be influential. Students felt that environmental games, tramping and minimal

impact camping practices had influenced their attitudinal improvement. The process of

attitudinal changes corresponded with Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Intention In and For the

Wilderness. Issues of imbalance in outdoor education curriculum foci are addressed, and a

framework for future practice and research is suggested.


iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

“Sustainability is our Responsibility”

I would like to express my greatest gratitute to the wonderful group of people who have

helped make this ‘journey’ a reality. Terima kasih (thank you) to:

• The Malaysian Public Service Department and the University Pendidikan of Sultan

Idris for sponsoring my study in this beautiful Dunedin city.

• My great supervisors Mike and Rowdy, for their extensive time, suggestions,

enthusiasm and encouragement. You guys are my role models.

• Robyn, for always lending me her critical ‘eyes’.

• ‘Mrs Lina’ and ‘Tom’ for their lovely camp experiences.

• Steve ‘Wildearth’, Julie, Lisa, Mala, Nick, Annie, Warwick - my greatest friends.

• All outdoor educators and practitioners who are always concerned about the well

being of our lovely environment.

• My late mother, grandmother and Aman who left me during this ‘journey’. Al-Fatihah

and God bless you.

• Pazilah, Izzah, Ain and Iman, my beloved friends. This ‘journey’ has taught us a lot

about life, love and family…

“Hidup ini suatu pengembaraan, tiada penghujung, tiada noktah!”

Life is like a never-ending journey


iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ..........................................................................................................................i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................. iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ iv

LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................x

CHAPTER ONE................................................................................................................ 1

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1

Significance of the study ............................................................................................... 3

The purpose of the study .............................................................................................. 4

CHAPTER TWO............................................................................................................... 6

LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................. 6

Environmental attitudes................................................................................................. 6

The development of environmental attitudes ............................................................7

Changing environmental attitudes.............................................................................8

1. Predisposing factors ..............................................................................................9

Age..........................................................................................................................9

Gender ..................................................................................................................10

Home environment .................................................................................................11

Previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities ....................12

2. Knowledge and beliefs ........................................................................................13

Outdoor education ......................................................................................................... 14

Outdoor education as a social construction ............................................................15

Outdoor education in New Zealand.........................................................................16

The uniqueness......................................................................................................17

The focus of outdoor education ...............................................................................17

Critical outdoor education........................................................................................20

Previous studies ............................................................................................................. 21

Summary ........................................................................................................................... 25


v

CHAPTER THREE ........................................................................................................ 26

METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................... 26

Research questions ...................................................................................................... 26

Methodological rationale ............................................................................................. 27

Methods ............................................................................................................................. 28

Quantitative methods...............................................................................................28

a. Underlying assumptions...................................................................................28

b. Design............................................................................................................29

c. Instrumentation ...............................................................................................29

d. Data analysis ..................................................................................................31

e. Limitations ......................................................................................................31

Qualitative methods.................................................................................................32

a. Underlying assumptions...................................................................................32

b. Qualitative measures.......................................................................................32

c. Qualitative data analysis ..................................................................................35

d. Researcher’s background ................................................................................35

e. Trustworthiness...............................................................................................35

f. Ethical procedures...........................................................................................37

g. Predicted outcomes.........................................................................................37

The research group....................................................................................................... 37

The school.................................................................................................................38

Participants ..............................................................................................................38

The school’s outdoor education programmes .........................................................38

Setting......................................................................................................................39

Study procedure ............................................................................................................. 39

a. Initial contact...................................................................................................39

b. Administering pre test ......................................................................................39

c. Camp participation and observation..................................................................40

d. Teacher and parent interviews .........................................................................41

e. Administering post-test ....................................................................................41

f. Student interviews ...........................................................................................41


vi

CHAPTER 4 ..................................................................................................................... 42

QUANTITATIVE RESULTS....................................................................................... 42

Research question 1..................................................................................................... 43

Overall results..........................................................................................................43

The rank order of environmental attitudes...............................................................43


Gender .....................................................................................................................45

Number of siblings ...................................................................................................46

Worldviews...............................................................................................................48

Preferred recreational activities ...............................................................................49

Previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities ..............50

The influences of modes of experience on environmental attitudes ......... 52

Modes of experience and gender ............................................................................52

Modes of experience and number of siblings..........................................................53

Modes of experience and worldviews .....................................................................54

Modes of experience and preferred recreational activities......................................54

Summary of key findings............................................................................................. 55

CHAPTER 5 ..................................................................................................................... 57

QUALITATIVE RESULTS........................................................................................... 57

The interview participants........................................................................................... 58

Students...................................................................................................................58

Teacher and parent .................................................................................................58

General knowledge on environmental issues..........................................................59

The Camp ......................................................................................................................... 61

Research Question 1.................................................................................................... 61



Direct environmental activity....................................................................................64

Indirect environmental activity .................................................................................65

Tramping activities..................................................................................................65

Minimal impact camping activities ............................................................................66


vii

Deep environmental thinking ...................................................................................67

The importance of a direct environmental focus in camp........................................68


Summary of key findings............................................................................................. 71

CHAPTER 6 ..................................................................................................................... 72

DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................. 72



Gender .....................................................................................................................76

Number of siblings ...................................................................................................77

Environmental worldview.........................................................................................78

Preferred recreational activities ...............................................................................79

Previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities ..............80


Activities with a direct environmental focus.............................................................82

The importance of direct environmental focus in this camp....................................84

Activity with indirect environmental focus................................................................86

Minimal impact camping practices...........................................................................87

Deep environmental thinking ...................................................................................88


Summary, recommendation and conclusion....................................................... 94

Pre-camp .................................................................................................................95

The camp.................................................................................................................95

Post-camp................................................................................................................97

Suggestion for future research ................................................................................97

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................98

References ....................................................................................................................... 99

Appendix A: Questionnaire ...................................................................................... 109

Appendix B: Students interview guide................................................................. 116

Appendix C: Ethics committee approval............................................................. 118


viii

Appendix D: The school’s outdoor education documents ........................... 119

Aims and objectives.............................................................................................. 119

Outdoor education scheme and unit plan............................................................. 120

Appendix E: Camp programme and unit plan .................................................. 121

Camp programme................................................................................................. 121

Camp’s unit plan ................................................................................................... 122

Appendix F: Letter and information sheet .......................................................... 123

Letter to school ..................................................................................................... 123

Information sheet and consent form for Principal................................................. 124

Information sheet and consent form for parents/caregivers................................. 127

Information sheet and consent form for participants ............................................ 130

Appendix G: Lesson plan.......................................................................................... 133

Appendix H: Teacher interview guide.................................................................. 135

Appendix I: Parent interview guide ....................................................................... 136


ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness………….

9

Figure 2: Law’s (1998) Outdoor Education Foci …………………………………………

18

Figure 3: Creswell’s (2003) Concurrent Triangulation Strategy…………………………

27

Figure 4: The rank percentage of students’ environmental attitudes in pre and post-camp………………………………………………………………………….

43

Figure 5: Mean comparison between overall MGOAI and subscales score in the pre and post-tests…………………………………………………………….

44

Figure 6: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by gender …………………………………………………………………………

46

Figure 7: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by number of siblings ……………………………………………………………

47

Figure 8: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by worldviews …………………………………………………………………….

48

Figure 9: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by preferred recreational activities………………………………………………

50

Figure 10: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by the level of experiences………………………………………………………

51

Figure 11: Mean comparison between modes of experiences and gender…………….

52

Figure 12: Mean comparison between modes of experiences and number of siblings…………………………………………………………..

53

Figure 13: Mean comparison between modes of experiences and worldviews………..

54

Figure 14:

Mean comparison between modes of experiences and preferred recreational activities…………………………………..………..

54

Figure 15: Process of attitudinal changes, adapted from Hanna (1995)………….……..

90


x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: MGOAI score rank…………………………………………………………………..

30

Table 2: In-depth interviews. ………………………………………………………………...

34

Table 3: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test scores……………………………………………………………

43

Table 4: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI subscales with pre and post-test scores………………………………………….

44

Table 5: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by gender……………………………………………....

45

Table 6: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by number of siblings…………………………………

46

Table 7: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by worldviews …………………………………………

48

Table 8: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by preferred recreational activities ………………….

49

Table 9: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test scores, by the level of experience……………………………

51

Table 10: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing modes of experience and gender…………………………………………………………………………..

52

Table 11: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing modes of experience and number of siblings……………………………………………………………..

53

Table 12: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing modes of experience and worldviews………………………………………………………………………

53

Table 13: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing modes of experience and preferred recreational activities………………………………………………

54


1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Debates over environmental issues have been rife over the last quarter of a century.

Every day, humans are exposed to the impact of environmental degradation throughout the

world (Caiazza & Barrett, 2003; Eberstadt, 2000). Greenhouse gases, heat waves, long-

lasting droughts and ozone depletion have killed thousands of people (Grove, 2002). Most of

these appear to be caused by human exploitation of natural resources, fuelled by a widening

sense of human-nature separation (Suzuki, 1999). Aware of these consequences,

environmental groups and individuals have long proposed heightening positive

environmental attitudes, and to once again make connections with the natural environment.

Environmental attitudes develop from feelings of concern towards the environment

(Charpentier, 1992). They are learned and expressed through affective, behavioural and

cognitive domains (Szagun & Pavlov, 1995). Several studies have identified that

environmental attitudes are formed at an early age, influenced by socio-demographic factors

such as gender, place of residence and lifestyle, as well as previous outdoor experiences

(Atkinson, 1990; Bechtel, 1997; Bogner, 1998; Dunlap & Heffernan, 1975; Halloran, 1967;

Keighley, 1997).

The enhancement of environmental attitudes has been identified as an important

precursor to solving environmental issues, as attitudes may influence human behaviour

(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). It has been hypothesised that a person with strong environmental

attitudes will act positively towards the natural environment (Cothrell & Graefe, 1997). In

supporting this hypothesis, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO), through The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP),

has promoted the importance of environmental attitudes as part of a strategy for protecting

the natural environment (Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, 1995; Fuller,

1998).

In New Zealand, positive environmental attitudes are becoming more common and

have a special place in social contexts. The Green Party1, which has influence within the

ruling government, has long highlighted the importance of environmental attitudes among

New Zealanders. Through the activities of The Department of Conservation (DoC) and the

introduction of a ‘Clean Green’ image campaign of the Environmental 2010 Strategy, the

government has targeted New Zealand to be one of the most environmentally sustainable

countries in the world (Ministry for The Environment, 1994). In trying to achieve this target,

1 New Zealand’s Green Party is a political party which specifically focuses upon environmental protection.


2

the government has also given serious attention to New Zealand’s educational sector. This is

evidenced by the introduction of environmental education in the formal curriculum, the

establishment of Education Outside the Classroom (EOTC) programmes and the introduction

of outdoor education activities in the Health and Physical Education curriculum (Ministry of

Education, 1992, 1999a, 1999b). Each of these curriculum areas propose that environmental

attitudes are best developed in an outdoor educational context.

Outdoor education has been defined as education in, about and for the outdoors

(Ford, 1986; Priest, 1986). As a unique and evolving learning medium, outdoor education

can be viewed as a process, a place, a purpose and/or a topic (Ford, 1986). Outdoor

education has three main foci: (1) environmental studies or environmental education; (2)

social and personal development, and; (3) outdoor pursuits skills. All of these foci emphasise

holistic individual development through mind, body and spirit (Dahlgren & Szczepanski,

1998).

New Zealand boasts vast areas of wild, open spaces in relation to its population base

which present a wonderful context for outdoor education. The National Park network for

example, protects fully one quarter of New Zealand’s land mass (Department of

Conservation, 2002). These protected spaces, along with reasonable access to privately

owned land, to coastlines, lakes and rivers suggest the outdoors should be an integral part of

learning for New Zealanders. The bridging of Maori culture with European – New Zealanders

(Pakeha) virtues similarly suggests outdoor education could (and should) involve strong

spiritual relationships between humans and the natural environment, the development of

holistic approaches to learning and the use of the environment as a medium of curriculum

enrichment (Boyes, 2000; Legge, 1998; Patterson, 1994). Some researchers further suggest

that the introduction of EOTC and outdoor education in the formal school’s curriculum, and

the establishment of residential outdoor education (ROE) centres throughout the country,

might has promoted the development of outdoor education in New Zealand (Abbott, 1990;

Boyes, 2000; Lynch, 1999).

For the purposes of this study, a ROE camp is defined as students spending at least

one night in an outdoor setting with a curriculum based programme. The settings can range

from basic campsites to well-equipped residential centres (Hayllar, 1990). In New Zealand,

ROE centres were developed either by the government, non-profit organisations, churches,

and educational institutions or by individuals (Lynch, 1999). One of the purposes of these

centres is in providing every New Zealand child with human-nature direct interactions, thus

promoting the development of positive environmental attitudes (see Sir Edmund Hillary

Outdoor Pursuits Centre (OPC) mission statement at http://www.opc.org.nz).

A number of researchers have questioned the relationship between a ROE camp and

the improvement of environmental attitudes. These questions emerged as a number of

studies conducted in the outdoor education field found insignificant environmental attitude


3

improvements (Leberman, 1989; Mackay, 1981; Paxton & McAvoy, 2000; Shepard &

Speelman, 1986). For example, Mackay (1981) found insignificant improvement among

students who participated in ROE camps in Canterbury. Leberman (1989) similarly found that

another New Zealand residential camp failed to develop conservation attitudes among the

participants. Supporting these findings Eagles and Demare (1999) found an insignificant

correlation between past camping experiences and environmental attitudes among 12 years

old students.

Law (1998) critiques current outdoor education practices as being too much focused

on outdoor pursuits, and social and personal development. These practices have resulted in

the environmental strand of outdoor education being left behind. The emphasis upon

adventurous activities in some outdoor education programmes has created the perception of

the outdoors as something to be conquered for personal satisfaction and thus has fostered a

sense of human-nature separation (Martin, 1999).

Significance of the study

Over the last 30 years many studies have been conducted examining the effects of

ROE camps on the improvement of environmental attitudes (Crompton & Sellar, 1981; Driver

& Johnson, 1984; Gillett, Thomas, Skok, & McLaughlin, 1991; Leberman, 1989; Mackay,

1981; Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt, Sanker, & VanderVeer, 1999; Perdue & Warder, 1981;

Shepard & Speelman, 1986). However fewer studies have been conducted subsequent to

the 1990’s. Ewert (1987), supported by Leeming, Dwyer, Porter, and Cobern (1993),

proposed that one of the main reasons for the declined of this research activity is the

complicated relationship between outdoor education and environmental attitudes. Socio-

demographic factors (e.g. age, gender, social environment), previous outdoor experiences,

and programme elements themselves have all been found to affect the results of the studies

(Eagles & Muffitt, 1990; Perdue & Warder, 1981; Shepard & Speelman, 1986).

Haluza-Delay (1999) and Law (1998) both suggest that environmental awareness

and positive environmental attitude development has not been a serious focus in outdoor

education programmes. This may be related to less research among researchers, who are

more interested in examining the outcomes of other outdoor education foci such as outdoor

pursuits and social and personal development. In addition, almost 50 percent of studies

conducted in the outdoor environmental education field found non-significant outcomes as a

result of inappropriate measurement tools, lack of a specific environmental education focus

in the programmes, single method boundness, and sampling error (Eagles & Demare, 1999;

Leberman, 1989; Mackay, 1981). Such findings may also have created a sense of

uncertainty among researchers about further examination into environmental attitudes. It

appears there is some uncertainty for outdoor education program directors and teachers as


4

to how best to approach the issue of developing environmental attitudes within outdoor

education. Furthermore, few recent studies have examined the specific elements of ROE

camps and how these might influence the improvement of environmental attitudes. To better

understand environmental attitudes and their formation within outdoor education, empirical

research is needed.

The purpose of the study

This investigation consisted of a two-part study designed to examine environmental

attitudes within outdoor education. The first purpose was to identify the effects of a ROE

camp on a group of New Zealand intermediate school (Year Eight = 11 to 13 years) students’

environmental attitudes. The second purpose was to identify camp elements that might

influence the changes of environmental attitudes. A combination of both quantitative and

qualitative methods were employed to answer the following research questions:

1. Does a residential outdoor education (ROE) camp cause a change in students’

environmental attitudes?

2. If so, how are changes in the students’ environmental attitudes influenced by the

socio-demographic variables of:

(a) gender

(b) number of siblings

(c) environmental worldview (biocentric, ecocentric)

(d) preferred recreational activities

(e) previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education

3. What elements of a residential outdoor education camp do the students perceive as

influencing their environmental attitudes?

4. If changes in environmental attitudes take place, when and how do they occur?

This study utilised a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods with a

concurrent triangulation strategy (Creswell, 2003). A concurrent triangulation strategy is a

combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods for the purpose of gaining optimally

useful data. The collection of data is concurrent and within a single phase of the research

study. The data is analysed separately using appropriate qualitative and quantitative data

analysis techniques and, finally, results are compared in order to answer the research

questions. This method was adopted for its logistical expediency, its ability to provide thick

rich data, and to minimise biases from a single method approach (Greene, 2001).

The Millward Ginter Outdoor Attitude Inventory (MGOAI) was used to assess

environmental attitude changes through pre and post test techniques. The MGOAI

instrument has been used previously to determine the improvement of environmental


5

attitudes in ROE camp settings (Mackay, 1981; Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). In

addition, a socio-demographic questionnaire was used to assess students’ demographic

backgrounds that potentially influence the students’ environmental attitude changes. Field

observation, a reflective journal and in-depth interviews were used to examine the elements

of camp that may have influenced the improvement of environmental attitudes.

As a popular learning process in outdoor education, a ROE camp setting was utilised

in this study. It is believed that a ROE camp provides greater opportunities for living and

working in the natural environment, which may influence the development of human-nature

relationships (Wright, 1997). Intermediate school students were the focus of this study as

previous researchers have identified that students of this age (11 to 13 year age group) are

very receptive to learning about the environment (Centre for Educational Research and

Innovation, 1995; Eagles & Demare, 1999; Fishbein, 1967). It was envisaged that working

with intermediate school students in a ROE camp setting might maximise the environmental

attitudes developmental process and provide an ideal research environment.


6

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

As environmental problems are seriously impacting upon the modern world, some

researchers have highlighted the importance of positive attitudinal changes towards the

environment (e.g. Dunlap & Jones, 2002; Knapp, 1999; Tarrant & Green, 1999). It is

proposed that environmental attitude changes would generate pro-environmental societies

who are concerned for and protective of the natural environment. Outdoor education

activities that provide direct human-nature experiences, especially in the residential camp

setting, have been promoted as powerful mediums for promoting these changes (Hayllar,

1990; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). However some researchers have challenged this idea as

recent outdoor education practices have failed to provide strong evidence for the

improvement of environmental attitudes (Eagles & Demare, 1999; Hammitt, 1995).

The review is divided into three sections. Section one provides an overview of

environmental attitudes, including their influences and developmental processes. Section two

highlights outdoor education, including current New Zealand practices and their influences on

environmental attitudinal improvement. The third section discusses previous studies that

have investigated the impact of residential outdoor education (ROE) camps on the

improvement of environmental attitudes.

Environmental attitudes

Environmental attitudes can be examined from a wide range of perspectives and this

has created a lack of clarity and some confusion. Such confusion exists because

environmental attitudes are bounded by individual perceptions and social constructions,

promoting various meanings and interpretations (Szagun & Pavlov, 1995). It is therefore,

worth discussing arguments from previous researchers in order to generate a deeper

understanding of environmental attitudes.

Generally speaking, environmental attitudes are defined as awareness of the earth,

or environmentally sensitive attitudes which develop from “…the need of an individual to feel

a closeness to our earth…, when so many of the planet’s natural systems are deteriorating

into a crisis condition” (Charpentier, 1992, p.59). In another definition, Szagun and Pavlov

(1995) highlighted environmental attitudes as feelings and values towards the environment

that could be expressed through cognitive, affective and behavioural responses. Benenati


7

(1992) similarly emphasised environmental attitudes as ecological principles that highlight

the knowledge, appreciation, sensitivity and responsibility for the natural world.

Based on these definitions, most researchers have highlighted environmental

attitudes as environmentally sensitive feelings which form an attitude. Attitudes are defined

as a very basic individual thought, which involves an evaluative process of mental, motor and

sense domains towards an object and expressed through overt and covert actions (Hogg &

Vaughan, 1995). In summary, this study defines environmental attitudes as environmental

sensitiveness, formed through affective, cognitive and behavioural processes, and expressed

through overt and covert actions.

The development of environmental attitudes

Although concern for the environment was acknowledged in early colonial times,

environmental attitudes in the postmodernism era have been heavily influenced by Aldo

Leopold’s ‘land’s ethic’ theory (Callicott, 2000; Grove, 2002). Leopold (1887 – 1948) was a

world-renowned scientist, biologist and ecologist who contributed much of his life to

promoting conservation practices. Leopold believed that modern technologies heavily

impacted lifestyles and created a human-nature separatist worldview; which he believed was

at the root of serious environmental degradation. Leopold’s ideas were strongly supported by

several environmental philosophers and activists such as Rachel Carson and Arne Naess

who influenced the establishment of the deep ecology movement.

According to Henderson (1990), deep ecology is a philosophy for thinking and living

that advocates living in harmony with the environment as a means to minimise environmental

problems. Supporters of the deep ecology movement are concerned that the dominant

environmental approach sustained by the separatist worldview is shallow and seriously

misguided as it only concerns itself with the human-being (Henderson, 1999). They also

believe that technological and scientific approaches to environmental problems are not

effective because they themselves often lead to further new environmental problems

(Drengson, 1997). Deep ecologists argue that preserving the earth’s biodiversity and

ecological integrity through changes in human lifestyles and environmental worldviews is a

fundamentally more commonsense approach (Callicott, 2000; Knapp, 1999).

Environmental worldview refers to an individual’s beliefs, feelings, and actions for the

natural environment. Researchers have suggested two distinct environmental worldviews: (1)

anthropocentric – an environmental worldview based on human centred views which

believed that human and the environment are separated, therefore the environment can be

exploited for human purposes; and (2) ecocentric – an environmental worldview based on

human-nature relationships, where all organisms have the same value (Calicott, 2000;

Hanna, 1995; Knapp, 1999).


8

Leopold, Carson and Naess’s promotion of widespread worldview changes was

strongly supported by the 1970’s environmentalist movement, which later proposed the

ecocentric worldview as promoting attitudes of environmental sensitivity (Dunlap &

Heffernan, 1975; Dunlap & Jones, 2002). Many more recent terms have evolved such as:

environmental attitudes, earth awareness, environmental concern, ecological attitudes, New

Environmental Paradigm (NEP) and environmental awareness (Russel, 2001; Szagun &

Pavlov, 1995; Wiegel & Wiegel, 1978).

Changing environmental attitudes

Taylor, Peplau, and Sears (1994) proposed four major types of attitudinal change.

First, an attitude may change through an introduction of totally new attitudes. This type of

change normally happens at a young age when a person does not have specific and

enduring environmental attitudes. The second type involves the rejection of old attitudes and

their replacement with new attitudes. This normally occurs when the new attitudes are more

relevant and useful than the old attitudes. Thirdly, environmental attitudes may change

through changing the direction of attitudes, from pro to anti; like littering for instance. Finally,

attitudinal changes could occur through increasing or strengthening the intensity of former

attitudes, for example transferring neutral environmental attitudes to responsible

environmental behaviours.

The present study adapts Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the

Wilderness [which itself was based on the work of Fishbein and Ajzen (1975; 1980)] to

examine the effects of a ROE camp on intermediate school (11 to 13 year) students’

environmental attitudes levels. Hanna’s theoretical model was chosen as it has been

partially utilised in several recent outdoor recreation and ROE camp studies (Daigle, Hrubes,

& Ajzen, 2002; Hammitt, 1995; Hanna, 1995). The model specifically highlights the

evaluation and meditating component which is an important part of an experiential learning

process; the predominant teaching process employed in outdoor learning situations.

Hanna’s (1995) theoretical model assumes that predisposing factors (e.g. personality

factors, socio-demographics, previous experiences) interact with individual environmental

knowledge and beliefs through evaluative and meditative processes. If the predisposing

factors and knowledge are relevant and the individual is motivated to change, they may

adapt, change, strengthen or even reject their previous environmental attitudes (Taylor et al.,

1994). According to the theory, improvement in environmental attitudes may also lead to the

formation of environmental intention and behaviour. The improvement in environmental

behaviour may then influence knowledge and beliefs for the environment (see Figure 1).

As the primary purpose of the study is to examine the effects of a ROE camp on

environmental attitudes, the following section will highlights the two components of the


9

theory: (1) predisposing factors; and (2) knowledge and beliefs that influenced the process of

attitudinal changes.

1. Predisposing factors

Predisposing factors are essentially an individual’s social environment (Fishbein &

Ajzen 1975; 1980). Ewert (1989) suggested that these include personality factors, socio-

demographic variables and previous experiences. Previous ROE camp studies have shown

that the most frequently noted predisposing factors or social environments affecting

children’s environmental attitudes are: (1) age; (2) gender; (3) home environment, and; (4)

previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities (Dettmann-Easler &

Pease, 1999; Eagles & Demare, 1999; Eagles & Muffitt, 1990; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999;

Shepard & Speelman, 1986). Before addressing knowledge and beliefs; the following section

discusses each of these predisposing factors.

Age The Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (1995) suggests that age is

influential in the process of attitudinal improvement, and that environmental attitudes are best

developed between the ages of 2 and 16 years. Paxton and McAvoy (2000) and Pennington,

Gillen, and Hill (1999) believe that environmental attitudes formed at a young age would last

and be carried over to influence behaviour in adulthood.

Figure 1: Hanna’s (1995) Theoretical Model of Involvement In and For the

Wilderness

Predisposing factors

Knowledge and beliefs


Environmental Intention

Environmental Behaviour


10

Jaus (1984) examined the effectiveness of environmental attitudinal development for

young children by studying a two-hour environmental lesson among Year Three primary

school students. Jaus found that significant environmental attitude changes among the

students lasted for two years after the first test.

Shepard and Speelman (1986) found that nine-year old students had more positive

environmental attitudes when compared to older students (11 to 14 years old) after

participating in ROE camps. Eagles and Demare (1999) and Eagles and Muffitt (1990)

presented similar results.

Chawla (1999) studied 56 environmentalists from the USA and Norway to determine

the sources of their environmental commitment. Most of the respondents said that they had

been influenced by childhood’s experiences in natural areas (e.g. tramping, camping). Family

and education was also cited as influential factors.

In contrast Tikka, Kuitunen, and Tynys (2000), who studied the effects of different

educational backgrounds on students’ environmental attitudes, argued that age is a

significant factor in its own right. Their results suggest that older students are more

environmentally aware than younger ones. In further analysis they determined that age level

might not have any major effects on the improvement of environmental attitudes. Rather

gender variables were more influential.

Gender Several studies have found environmental attitude differences between girls and boys

(e.g. Tikka et al., 2000; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). Tikka et al.(2000) proposed that the

differences were influenced by gender learning differences. Studies have found that girls are

more positive with subjects involving symbols and feelings (e.g. Arts, Literature, Language),

while boys are more interested in physical subjects (Klienfeld, 1998; Weinburgh & Englehard,

1994). It could be said that as learning about the environment involved personal feelings,

girls may have benefit more. In support, Mittelstaedt et al. (1999) found girls were more

environmentally friendly than boys after participating in a ROE camp. One year later, the

attitudes were transferred to behaviour with girls once again scoring the highest gains.

However the findings of Mittelstaedt et al. (1999) and Tikka et al. (2000) could be

contested as several previous studies did not find any differences at all (see Leberman,

1989; Mackay, 1981). In addition Scott and Willits (1994), who conducted a survey among

U.S. adults, found that both males and females had the same level of environmental

attitudes. Their results indicate that males participate more in environmentally political

behaviour, such as discussing environmental issues with politicians and participation in

environmental organisations, whilst females participate in more environmentally protective

behaviour, such as conservation, recycling and purchasing biodegradable products.


11

Insignificant gender environmental attitude differences were also recorded by Eagles

and Demare (1999) and Eagles and Muffitt (1990). They identified the influences of home

environment, such as parents and siblings’ behaviour, media, and daily lifestyles, as more

powerful than gender in influencing environmental attitudes.

Home environment

Eagles and Demare (1999) and Eagles and Muffitt (1990) found that discussing

environmental issues with parents and siblings, watching environmental television programs,

reading environmental books, and pet ownership all have a strong influence on the

development of environmental attitudes. Ryan (1991) and Dresner and Gill (1994) found that

students whose parents and siblings were involved in environmental activities were more

environmentally aware than those who are not. Chawla (1999) found that family members

such as parents, older siblings, and grandparents had a major influence on the commitment

of environmental protection among 56 environmentalists.

Fortner and Lyon (1985) conducted a study to examine the effects of environmental

television programs on the audiences’ environmental attitudes. Their study involved 500

viewers who were divided equally into experimental and control groups. At the end of the

programs, the experimental group recorded significant environmental attitude improvement

that lasted for two weeks.

Shepard and Speelman (1986) investigated the influence of residential place in

environmental attitudes development. They argue that rural children are more

environmentally aware than those who live in the city. They subsequently proposed that

pristine and less polluted surroundings in the rural develop more positive attitudes towards

the environment. In contrast Tikka et al.(2000) found that students who lived in a city are

actually more environmentally aware than those who live in the suburbs. They suggest that

city life may expose the students to serious environmental issues that subsequently affect

their environmental attitudes in unique ways. Based on these arguments, it appears that the

influence of residential place on attitude formation is vague, arguable and influenced by the

social practices and community lifestyles of each specific place.

In researching the influence of social practices and daily lifestyles on environmental

attitudes, Gigliotti (1992) compared the level of environmental attitudes among 1500 Cornell

University’s undergraduate students with similar studies done in 1971 and 1981. He found

that the students‘ environmental attitudes were decreasing in strength, and were less

concerned with practicing environmental friendly lifestyles (e.g. recycling, buying

biodegradable products) than the previous students. In addition, most of the students

believed that modern technologies and inventions could easily cope with global

environmental problems. Gigliotti then highlighted the deep ecological ideas about the need


12

for lifestyle and environmental worldview changes in generating a better environment. He

proposed that these changes were best developed through formal and informal educational

approaches, which allow the students to reflect on their connection with the environment.

Previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities

Since the 1970’s several researchers have examined the effect of outdoor activities

on the improvement of environmental attitudes (Dunlap & Heffernan, 1975; Jackson, 1986;

Liere & Noe, 1981; Tarrant & Cordell, 1997; Tarrant & Green, 1999). One of the influential

studies in examining this relationship was conducted by Dunlap and Heffernan (1975). The

researchers used the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) survey instruments to examine

the impact of outdoor recreational activities on the environmental attitudes of 3101 adults in

Washington State. The outdoor recreational activities were divided into three main

categories: (1) motorised - recreational activities which involve motorised transportation (e.g.

four wheel drive, jet-boating, motorcycle); (2) consumptive - recreational activities in which

the participants manipulate or consume resources from the natural environment (e.g. fishing,

hunting), and; (3) appreciative - recreational activities in which the outdoors was used as a

medium of appreciation, enjoyment and education (e.g. hiking, bird watching, snorkelling).

The study recorded significant influences of appreciative recreational activities on the

improvement of environmental attitudes. Dunlap and Heffernan then proposed that

appreciative recreational activities bring participants closer to the natural environment

because they involve less environmental and technological manipulation than motorised and

consumptive recreational activities. This situation provides more time for participants to

develop a direct interaction with the natural environment, which leads to the development of

positive human-nature relationships. These relationships promoted feelings of empathy,

awareness, and concern for the environment, thus resulted in the improvement of

environmental attitudes. Jackson (1986), Liere and Noe (1981) and Tarrant and Green

(1999) all replicated Dunlap and Heffernan (1975) study and found similar results.

Haluza-DeLay (2001) conducted an ethnography study examining the perception of

the natural places and the improvement of environmental attitudes and behaviour among

eight teenagers who participated in a 12-day outdoor educational tramping trip. He found that

smell, sound recollection, and emotive characteristics (e.g. relaxing, sense of freedom) had

influenced the improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes. However the trip failed

to improve the teenagers’ environmental behaviour, as they perceived their daily

environment as ‘not natural’.


13

2. Knowledge and beliefs

Returning to Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness,

knowledge and beliefs influenced the process of attitudinal change. Eagly and Chaiken

(1993) suggest that improved knowledge and beliefs may lead to improved attitudes.

Previous researchers have examined the influence of educational level, jobs, and academic

focus (e.g. biology, engineering and economy) on environmental attitudinal development and

improvement (Liere & Noe, 1981; Scott & Willits, 1994; Theodori, Luloff, & Willits, 1998).

They found that people with higher educational levels were more environmentally aware than

those who were not. Based on Baron and Bryne's (2000) assumption about learning and

knowledge as the basis of attitude formation, these researchers proposed that higher

educational levels acted as a catalyst for the improvement of environmental attitudes.

However Tikka et al. (2000) who researched the effect of educational background on the

improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes, were opposed to such a position. In

their study they found biology students were more environmentally aware than economics or

engineering students although they had the same educational level. It was also found that

farmers’ children were more environmentally aware than businessmen’s children, although

there were distinct differences between parents’ educational backgrounds. Based on these

findings Tikka et al. proposed that environmental attitudes are more influenced by academic

focus rather than educational level.

For the present study academic focus refers to any educational approach that

emphasises a specific focus on environmental education objectives, ranging from classroom

to outdoor activities. Researchers have long highlighted the influences of improvement in

environmental knowledge and beliefs on the improvement of environmental attitudes

(Dresner & Gill, 1994; Jaus, 1984; Perdue & Warder, 1981). In studies in New Zealand,

Leberman (1989) and Mackay (1981) highlighted the importance of post-camp reinforcement

activities for the improvement of environmental attitudes, as it provided the support for

environmental knowledge gained from the camp. In an overseas study Jaus (1984) found

that the improvement of environmental knowledge in early ages could influenced the

improvement of environmental attitudes. He conducted a two-hour in-class environmental

education lesson among Year Three primary school students who were pre-tested before

and post-tested after the lesson. He found that the students recorded more environmental

knowledge and attitude improvement than the control group who had learned mathematics.

Two years later the improvements were still held by the majority of students.

Bogner (1998) and Dettmann-Easler and Pease (1999) similarly found the influences

of environmental knowledge and beliefs on the improvement of environmental attitudes.

These researchers then highlighted the need for long-term educational support in order to

promote everlasting environmental attitudinal improvement. McRae (1990a) highlighted the


14

importance of direct outdoor environmental experiences on the improvement of

environmental attitudes. He found significant improvement on environmental knowledge and

attitudes among students who had participated in a tramping trip. A year later these changes

were still held by the majority of the students, especially those who had been involved in

further outdoor education experiences. He concluded that direct outdoor environmental

experiences provide learners with strong environmental knowledge and beliefs. These

situations he felt developed deep empathy and awareness for the environment, and

generated strong and long lasting improvement.

Outdoor education

There has been significant discussion within theoretical and applied literature around

the semantics of outdoor education (Priest, 1986). Almost half a century ago, outdoor

education was defined as ‘education in, about and for the outdoors’ (Donaldson &

Donaldson, 1958). ‘Education in the outdoors’ referred to the use of the outdoor environment

as a learning source and setting for enriching the formal educational process. ‘Education

about the outdoors’ referred to outdoor education as a teaching method, where it provides

first hand learning experiences through direct interactions between self, society and nature.

Finally ‘education for the outdoors’ referred to outdoor education as a medium of

environmental responsibility and protection.

Donaldson and Donaldson’s (1958) definition has highlighted three key points for

outdoor education: (1) settings; (2) curriculum enrichment, and; (3) focus (Ford, 1986). With

this definition, outdoor education was viewed as a teaching method for curriculum

enrichment, conducted in natural environmental settings and primarily focused on

environmental protection. However, there has been widespread critique of such a definition

for outdoor education. Some researchers believed that the natural environment is not the

only setting for outdoor education as it can also take place in indoor settings (e.g. discussing

outdoor safety topics in the classroom, indoor wall climbing) (Smith, Carlson, Donaldson, &

Masters, 1972). Other researchers argued that outdoor education is a lifelong learning

process which not only concentrates on formal but informal learning as well (Priest, 1986).

Furthermore, as well as education for the outdoors, outdoor education is also a medium for

outdoor pursuits and individual development (Gair, 1997).

Smith et al. (1972, p.20) defined outdoor education as a “…means of curriculum

extension and enrichment through outdoor experiences”. Based on this definition, outdoor

education was viewed as a tool of formal curriculum enrichment. These researchers

assumed that classroom knowledge could be extended through outdoor activity experiences,

which normally occurs in the form of school camping and picnics.


15

Priest (1986) argued against Smith et al’s. (1972) definition as he believed that

outdoor education is not only emphasised in formal education, but also informally. He later

proposed outdoor education as “…an experiential process of learning by doing, which takes

place primarily through exposure to the out of doors” (p. 13). Through this definition, Priest

highlighted outdoor education as an experiential learning process which occurs either in the

outdoors or indoors for the purpose of promoting the lifelong learning process.

In contrast to previous outdoor education definitions, Gair (1997, p.3) defined outdoor

education as “a vehicle for offering young people adventurous and challenging

opportunities…to push forward their developmental barriers”. Here, outdoor education was

highlighted as a medium of individual development through adventurous and challenging

activities. In agreement with Kurt Hahn, the founder of the Outward Bound (OB) movement

and other education programmes worldwide, Gair believed that outdoor pursuits and

challenging activities are catalysts for generating healthy and responsible citizens.

Hammerman, Hammerman, and Hammerman (2001, p.2) proposed outdoor

education as “a contemporary curriculum development that is sometimes difficult to define. It

is a rather vague and nebulous educational concept”, and it has been applied in various

ways from a visit to a national museum to white-water kayaking. Based on this statement,

they highlighted outdoor education as a multidisciplinary subject which can be applied in any

curriculum area and which is primarily focused upon enhancing learning capabilities through

direct outdoor experiences.

Based on the above definitions, there is evidence of conceptual differences between

researchers. As education in, about and for the outdoors, outdoor education was also

defined as; (a) a medium of curriculum extension and enrichment (Smith et al., 1972); (b) an

experiential learning process (Priest, 1986); (c) outdoor pursuits activities (Gair, 1997), and;

(d) a method for teaching and learning (Hammerman et al., 2001). All these definitions and

personal views have made the process of defining outdoor education far more complicated

(Hammerman et al., 2001; McRae, 1990c; Priest, 1986).

In order to minimise the definitional debates, several researchers have proposed that

outdoor education should not be defined in shallow terms because it has evolved and formed

lots of new branches such as adventure education, environmental education, adventure

based learning, ecology education, and education outside the classroom (Boyes, 2000;

Lynch, 2000). These researchers thus proposed that outdoor education is best defined in

broad terms as it is influenced by current practices and socially constructed.

Outdoor education as a social construction

The notion of social construction is based on the premise that knowledge is

constructed and influenced by a historical and socio-cultural context (Schwandt, 2000). In


16

other words, a social construction is a concept where people view one particular thing (in this

case outdoor education) from their own perceptions. From a social constructionist view,

outdoor education definitions and practices are influenced by individual perceptions, the

creation of social practices, current societal contexts, cultures, history, politics and beliefs

(Brookes, 1994). This context will change over time as philosophies and practices continue

to evolve and develop.

The influences of social constructions can be witnessed in the ongoing outdoor

education definition debates. It is clear that many researchers defined outdoor education

from their own perspectives and current practices, which were influenced by their social

practices (Boyes, 2000; Williams, 2001). All of these diversities then created different outdoor

education assumptions, definitions and practices.

Outdoor education in New Zealand

The nature of outdoor education in New Zealand is very exciting and unique (Abbott,

1990; Priest, 1989). It is a blend of British, American and Maori influences, where it is

practiced as an educational methodology, a medium for social and physical development, an

agent for curriculum enrichment and a medium for environmental attitude development

(Boyes, 2000).

Outdoor education has evolved over a long period of time. Before the 1940’s, the

focus was purposely recreational, generally in the form of school picnics and camping. After

the1940’s, the focus shifted to be mainly educational, where it was used as a medium of

curriculum enrichment. From the mid 1970’s onwards, outdoor education appears to have

become affiliated primarily with physical education subjects (Lynch, 1998b).

The introduction of Education Outside the Classroom (EOTC) in 1986 by the Ministry

of Education potentially enriched outdoor education practices in New Zealand schools. In

1995 the government established the Environmental 2010 Strategy, an overall governmental

strategic plan for the environment. In promoting a ‘Clean Green’ image for New Zealand this

strategy recognises the importance of environmental education in all levels of educational

institutions, businesses, and communities (Ministry for The Environment, 1994).

This was then followed by the introduction of the new Health and Physical Education

curriculum in 1999, which specifically emphasised outdoor education as a key learning area

(Culpan, 1998; Lynch, 1999; Ministry of Education, 1999b). The new curriculum also

endorsed outdoor education as one of the learning methodologies in Science and Social

Studies. Bush studies, field trips and social research activities, which are integrated in these

curricula, have enriched New Zealand’s outdoor education practices (Ministry of Education,

1999c, 1999d).


17

The uniqueness

Abbott (1990), supported by Lynch (1998a), proposed that there were at least four

main factors that contributed to the uniqueness of New Zealand’s outdoor education

practices: (1) geographical factors; (2) the introduction of EOTC in the educational system;

(3) the introduction of outdoor education in the new Health and Physical Education

curriculum, and; (4) traditional Maori virtues.

New Zealand is a beautiful country, with many mountains, lakes, rivers, and beaches.

Most of these places are easily accessible, located within a few kilometres from the cities or

even at the back of residential areas (Abbott, 1990). Abbott suggested that these

geographical criteria have influenced many New Zealanders to get involved in outdoor

education activities for recreational and educational purposes.

The introduction of EOTC may have enriched New Zealand’s outdoor education

practices. Based on the concept of ‘education in the outdoors’; EOTC has become “an

integral part of the educational experience for many New Zealand’s children” (Gordon &

Dodunski, 1999,p.16). EOTC policy recognises outdoor education as a medium of curriculum

enrichment, despite the wider perspective of outdoor education as adventure education and

outdoor pursuits (Lynch, 1998a). Its main purpose is to promote the diversity of educational

opportunities beyond the classroom and enrich academic development.

Furthermore, the introduction of outdoor education in the 1999 Health and Physical

Education curriculum may have influenced the uniqueness of New Zealand’s outdoor

education. Lynch (2000) proposed that since outdoor education has been formalised in the

New Zealand’s formal educational system, it might further facilitate widespread outdoor

education participation in the future.

Finally, Maori traditional virtues may have influenced New Zealand’s outdoor

education practices. The Maori believed that there are strong relationships between humans

and the natural environment. The natural environment is given ‘waahi tapu’ (sacred) status or

‘noa’ (profane). Sometimes ‘rahui’ (restrictions) are put in place to respect the ‘wairua’ (spirit

of the environment) (Kearsley & Carr, 2000). These environmental and spiritual beliefs

created a sense of human-nature relationships and have been adopted into New Zealand’s

outdoor education, recreation, and tourism practices through native conservation, outdoor

living skills and the concept of human-nature interdependence (Boyes, 2000; Kearsley &

Carr, 2000; Legge, 1998; Patterson, 1994)

The focus of outdoor education

Law (1998), Ministry of Education (1999b) and Williams (2001) have proposed that

outdoor education should be comprised of a blend of three foci: (1) social and personal


18

development; (2) outdoor pursuits and; (3) environmental education or studies. These three

foci are presented in Figure 2.

Personal and social development focus concentrates on enhancing the holistic

potential of human beings. It also teaches the notion of responsibility, respecting others, self-

confidence and the sense of success. The aim of this focus is to promote holistic individual

development through affective, behavioural and cognitive domains. Adventure based

learning, problem solving, and team-building activities are among the popular activities in this

focus.

An outdoor pursuits or adventure education focus presents a combination of risk,

challenges and outdoor skills used to generate active learning experiences among students.

Kurt Hahn (1886 - 1974), the founder of the Outward Bound (OB) movement, had promoted

this idea. He proposed that a combination of risk, fun, and the sense of success and failure

could generate active participation, promote self-awareness and enhance learning

experiences (James, 1995). All of these criteria then motivate the students to do their best to

succeed; while at the same time enhancing their learning experiences. Rock climbing,

kayaking, high ropes challenges and sailing are among the activities.

Through an environmental education focus, outdoor education is seen as a medium of

environmental attitude enhancement. One of the key concepts in this focus is to increase

the students’ awareness and understanding of the importance of the natural environment. It

is proposed that through this focus, outdoor education activities might develop and enhance

human-nature relationships, leading to ecocentric environmental worldviews, and supporting

Outdoor pursuits and adventure education

Environmental education and

studies

Personal and social

development

Figure 2: Outdoor education focus model, adapted from Law (1998)


19

a ‘working together’ to care for the environment (Burrus-Bammel & Bammel, 1990; Thomas

& Thomas, 2000).

Some researchers and outdoor educators have highlighted the influence of an

environmental education focus on the improvement of environmental attitudes (Burrus-

Bammel & Bammel, 1990; Martin & Thomas, 2000). All believed that direct interaction

between human and the natural environments may develop human-nature relationships.

These relationships may generate feelings and sensitivity towards the environment, lead to

environmental protection and minimise the world’s crucial environmental problems.

Some suggest the environmental education focus has been left behind in many

outdoor education programmes with an emphasis on adventure and social development

(Brookes, 1994; Law, 1998; Martin, 1999). Moreover, some studies found weak support

between outdoor education and the improvement of environmental attitudes (Eagles &

Demare, 1999; Haluza-Delay, 2001; Leberman, 1989; Mackay, 1981). Other outdoor

education programs have neglected to focus upon minimal impact2 practices and these may

have resulted in several environmental problems in the outdoors (Hampton & Cole, 1988;

McEwen & Cole, 1997; Meyer, 1994).

In highlighting the issue of lack of environmental attitude improvement in current

outdoor education practices, Higgins (1996, p.37) stated “…modern outdoor recreation is

increasingly image conscious, gear intensive, regulated, and environmentally harmful”.

Loeffler (1999) supported Higgin’s argument and proposed that technological intervention in

outdoor education activities has lessened the duration of human-nature interactions; a

situation that may have resulted in less concern for the natural environment. On the other

hand, Haluza-DeLay (1999) proposed that this issue occurred because recent outdoor

education practices put too much emphasis on an outdoor pursuits focus, with the

environment used as a medium for challenge and risk seeking. This situation might have

created an enhanced sense of human-nature separation because the natural setting is

viewed as a playland rather than valuing it as a unique and priceless resource.

Law (1998) has raised the problem of an imbalance in New Zealand’s outdoor

education. He stated that: “The challenge for the next decade is to place a similar emphasis

on environmental education and redress the imbalance within these…dimensions” (p 18).

Through this statement, he highlighted that recent outdoor education practices concentrate

more on outdoor pursuits and individual development rather than an environmental education

focus. In order to minimise this issue, he proposed New Zealand’s outdoor educators should

balance their outdoor education programme foci.

2 Minimal impact integrates outdoor living skills that have minimal effects on the local environment (Christensen& Cole, 2000).


20

In discussing the issue of outdoor education foci imbalance, some outdoor

practitioners and researchers propose that it is crucial for outdoor education programmes to

promote critical thinking on human-nature relationships in their activities (Cooper, 1996;

Martin, 1999; Thomas & Thomas, 2000). This idea has been influential in the creation of

another branch of outdoor education: critical outdoor education.

Critical outdoor education

The key issue for critical outdoor education is the concept of human-nature

relationships and caring for the natural environment. This view believes that

“…environmental problems result from environmental practices, and environmental practices

are cultural activities” (Saul, 2000, p.5). Accordingly, social reforms are needed to minimise

environmental problems.

Critical outdoor education is rooted in social critical theory, which is concerned with

the impact of the dominant social order on social practices. In order to generate reform,

critical theorists highlighted the importance of criticism that is distinct from the social

practices and actions that are derived from the criticism (Bohman, 2001). Similar to Leopold

and the 1970’s environmental movement’s ideas, critical outdoor education theory suggests

that current social and economic practices are impacting heavily upon modern lifestyles. This

situation has weakened human-nature relationships as Horwood (1995, p.109) describes,

“…the malaise of our dominant Western culture is alienation from self, society and our fellow

creatures [the natural environment]”. This sense of separation potentially leads to exploitation

of natural resources, which may result in serious environmental degradation.

In order to minimise environmental problems, it was proposed that social reform is

needed (Martin, 1999). Critical outdoor education has been highlighted as one of the more

effective mediums for social reform as it involves less technological intervention and provides

chances for direct human-nature interaction.

Critical outdoor education focuses on human-nature relationships as a means to

generate knowledge, empathy and concern for the environment. This theory proposes that

human-nature relationships are best developed through a combination of well-plan

experiential learning, emotional and intuitive feelings, and low risk outdoor education

activities. These activities allow the students to enjoy and build their connection with the

natural environment freely. It is believed that these feelings of connectedness will drive

environmental protection action, which minimises the environmental problems. Cooper

(1997, p.24) supported this idea and stated

There are two main aspects that enhance participants’ awareness in the outdoors. The first one is a knowledge and understanding of issues influencing


21

the environment and our quality of life… The second is concerned with feeling and having a personal connection with the environment.

Martin (1999) believes that outdoor education provides opportunities for students to

temporarily withdraw from society. They are then in a position to apply a ‘lens’ in examining

their beliefs and practices. As a consequence, this process should develop the students’

critical thinking about the impact of their daily practices on the environment. This critical

thinking may promote the improvement of environmental attitudes which would take place

not only in the outdoor settings, but also in daily life (Martin & Thomas, 2000).

Previous studies

Many studies have been conducted in various outdoor education settings (e.g.

classroom, residential camp, expedition), and age levels (e.g. primary students, secondary

students, adults) to examine the effect of outdoor education programs on the improvement of

environmental attitudes (Hammitt, 1995; Hanna, 1995; Jaus, 1984; Keen, 1991; Leberman,

1989; McRae, 1990a). For the purpose of narrowing the scope of the study, the present

study only reviews the literature concerning young people (aged between 9 to 16 years old)

in residential outdoor education camp settings.

Residential outdoor education (ROE) is where participants spend at least one night

in the outdoors (Hammerman et al., 2001). Such a programme could occur either in a base

camp or on an expedition basis. Growing from the use of the name ‘school camping’, ROE

has evolved rapidly with the development of residential outdoor centres that vary from a

basic campsite to fully equipped infrastructure centres.

In ROE the participants learn to be independent, practice their social skills, share

group responsibilities, and make direct interactions with the natural environment via close

contact (Jeffrey, 2001). The participants also experience simple ways of living and become

aware of alternative leisure-time activities, because “…television, electronic games and

equipments, radios, CD players, and other devices that occupy a child’s time and attention

are left behind” (Hammerman et al., 2001, p.144).

Researchers have proposed a ROE camp as an excellent medium for the

improvement of environmental attitudes because it provides unique environmental learning

opportunities and direct contact with the natural environment (Hayllar, 1990; Jeffrey, 2001;

Chenery, 1994, Hammermann et al., 2001). The flexibility of programmes offered create a

sense of freedom which allows the students to spend more time in experiencing the natural

environment. Additionally, the ‘24 hour’ ROE camp learning experiences provides the

students with more time to interact with the natural environment than in-class programmes

(Chenery, 1994).


22

In examining the effects of ROE camps on the improvement of environmental

attitudes, Shepard and Speelman (1986) conducted a study among 613 students aged

between 9 to 14 years old. The camps were varied from three to five days in length. The

students were divided into two main groups where the experimental group was exposed to

outdoor adventure activities, while the control group was not. The students were pre and post

tested using the Camp Whitewood Survey instruments, which were developed specifically for

that study. It was found that the camps had little effects on the students’ environmental

attitudes. Furthermore, there were no significant differences on the level of environmental

attitudes between the experimental and control groups after the camps. However the

duration of the camp was influential, as the five-day camps seemed to have had slightly more

positive effects on the improvement of environmental attitudes than the three-day camps.

Based on Shepard and Speelman's (1986) findings, Bogner (1998) conducted a study

to compare the effects of one and five-day ROE camps on the improvement of environmental

attitudes. The sample was made up of 700 students aged between 12 to 13 years who were

pre and post tested before and approximately one month after the camp. Bogner found

significant environmental attitudes improvement on both programmes, with the five-day camp

recording the highest gain. As these findings were consistent with Shepard and Speelman's

(1986) study, he concluded that programme duration has a strong influence on the

improvement of environmental attitudes.

Eagles and Demare (1999) researched 72 Year Six students who participated in the

Sunship Earth Camp. The purpose of that study was to examine changes in the students’

moral and environmental attitudes. From the pre and post-test data, it was found that there

were no significant increases on student’s environmental attitudes level which they believed

to be influenced by ceiling effects. Ceiling effects are one of the Likert scale’s limitations,

occurs when respondents score high in both pre and post-tests and thus minimal changes on

the score are expected. In Eagles and DeMare’s study, most of the students entered the

camp with high environmental attitudes and minimal changes were recorded by the end of

the camp.

Methodological issues were also reported in Mackay (1981), Leberman (1986), and

Shepard and Speelman’s (1986) studies. All of these findings marked the limitation of

quantitative methods alone in researching environmental attitudinal changes.

To overcome some of the methodological limitations of outdoor education and

environmental attitudes studies, Dresner and Gill (1994) applied a mixed method approach in

their study of 28 campers, aged between 10 to 13 years. The foci of the study was to

examine the ROE camp’s effects on students self esteem, outdoor life skills, responsible

environmental behaviour and interest in the natural environment. Data was gained through

questionnaires, students’ journals and interviews. It was found that all of the study foci

increased significantly after the camp with the self-esteem focus gaining the highest scores.


23

In addition, they found a moderate correlation between self-esteem and responsible

environmental behaviour. They then proposed that self-esteem could promote environmental

action, as it is a major factor influencing the desire to take action.

A mixed method approach was also utilised by Dettmann-Easler and Pease (1999).

In their study, quantitative data were collected three weeks before, one week and three

months after the camp. In addition, 10 percent of the students were interviewed. The results

indicated that a ROE camp was more effective in developing wildlife attitudes than in-class

programmes. Furthermore, it was evident that these developments were lasting and

transferred into the students’ daily lives. Unfortunately however, these researchers failed to

address the camp’s elements that may cause the attitudinal change.

In examining the camp elements that may influence the improvement of

environmental attitudes, Millward (1973) conducted a study to examine the effects of using

two different teaching methods on Year Six primary school students. The sample was 300

students, aged between 9 to 12 years, who participated in ROE camps. Data was collected

one week before camp, after the camp, and three months later using an instrument

developed purposely for the study. The instrument was called the Millward Ginter Outdoor

Attitude Inventory (MGOAI) and contained 43 statements about environmental attitudes,

learning and socialisation processes in the outdoors. For further information on this

instrument, see the Methodology Chapter. Millward reported significant changes in the

students’ environmental and socialisation attitudes immediately after the camp with attitudes

towards selected education and pollution issues improved significantly during the three

months after the camp. There were no gender differences on the improvement of

environmental attitudes.

However some reviewers challenged Millward’s findings because both the

experimental and the control group showed significant increases on environmental attitudes

(Mackay, 1981). This situation has raised critical questions on the effectiveness of

environmental teaching methods in outdoor education camps on the improvement of

environmental attitudes. Millward proposed that this situation occurred because the

experimental group’s teachers did not apply a new environmental teaching strategy that they

had been taught; hence the research design was not adhered to.

Millward’s study is nonetheless important in outdoor education and environmental

attitude studies, as he has developed a useful instrument for measuring the level of

environmental attitudes. The MGOAI has been utilised and found useful in several studies

(e.g. Christy, 1982; Mackay, 1981).

The MGOAI instrument was also used in Mittelstaedt et al. (1999) study, which

researched the impact of a summer science camp on the improvement of environmental

attitudes. The researchers also examined the relationship between environmental attitudes

and behaviour. The sample was made up of 46 students, aged from 9 to 12 years. Through a


24

mixed method approach, MGOAI was used to measure environmental attitude changes

through pre and post-tests immediately before and after the camp. Open-ended

questionnaires were also utilised to identify the students’ environmental intentions. One year

later, the students’ environmental behaviours were investigated using open-ended

questionnaires. The researchers found that all of the participants already had positive

attitudes towards the environment and outdoor activities before they participated in the camp

(pre test mean 168; for further information on this score, refer to MGOAI rank order in the

following Methodology Chapter). By the end of the camp scores were about five points

higher, clearly showing that there was significant improvement on the students’

environmental attitudes as a result of participating in the camp. In contrast with Millward’s

(1973) findings, they found that girls scored higher than boys. One year later it was found

that most of the students had more positive environmental attitudes, with girls once again

gaining the highest scores. Unfortunately again, these researchers failed to address the

camp elements that might influence the improvement of environmental attitudes.

The elements that may influence the improvement of environmental attitude in camps

have been highlighted in a New Zealand study (Mackay, 1981) She examined the effects of

ROE camps on students’ self-concept and environmental attitudes. The study was

conducted among Canterbury’s Standard Four (10 years), Form Four (14 years), and Form

Six (16 years) students (n = 221), who were pre and post tested. MGOAI was used to

measure environmental attitudes, while the Piers Harris Self Concept instrument was used to

measure self-concept changes. The study outcomes recorded insignificant findings on both

environmental attitudes and self-concept development. Mackay highlighted three main

reasons for these: First, there was a lack of pre-camp exposure to environmental themes and

this resulted in some of the students attending the camp without any concern towards the

environment. Secondly, there was a lack of emphasis on environmental concepts and

activities during the camp. This situation may influence the students to focus on other

elements of the camp (e.g. social, personal and outdoor pursuits activities). Lastly, there was

a lack of environmental teaching strategies, which may prevent the improvement of

environmental attitudes during the camp. In conclusion, Mackay suggested future

researchers should consider all of these elements in their studies.

Mackay’s (1981) study is important in the New Zealand context because it reflects

young students’ environmental attitudes during that time. Unfortunately, there has yet to be

further study re-examining the three critical elements that she proposed. Although it is

believed that New Zealanders’ environmental attitudes have improved subsequently, and

with the introduction of EOTC, Environmental 2010 Strategy, and outdoor education in the

formal curriculum, these arguments lack research support (Ministry for The Environment,

1994, 1996). Further study is needed to better examine Mackay’s insights in a contemporary

New Zealand context.


25

Summary

Modern societies face serious dilemmas as a consequence of environmental

problems. In order to minimise these problems, some researchers have highlighted the

importance of environmental attitude changes, as basis of human thoughts, feelings and

actions (e.g. Dunlap, 1975; Knapp, 1999). Outdoor education activities, especially in

residential outdoor education (ROE) settings, have been identified as one of the more

effective mediums in promoting these changes (Benenati, 1992; Hayllar, 1990; Wright,

1997). Based on this assumption, a number of researchers have examined the effects of

participating in ROE on the improvement of environmental attitudes (Bogner, 1998;

Dettmann-Easler & Pease, 1999; Leberman, 1989; Mackay, 1981; Millward, 1974;

Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). It is evident that these studies overtime have contributed two

important factors in outdoor education research: (1) methodological use, and; (2) the

development of environmental attitude instruments.

In early studies, quantitative methods were utilised to research the effectiveness of

ROE camp on the improvement of environmental attitudes (Mackay, 1981; Millward, 1974).

Unfortunately, some of these studies reported insignificant outcomes and were rife with

methodological problems (see Eagles & Demare, 1999; Mackay, 1981; Shepard &

Speelman, 1986). It was evident that methodological problems such as ceiling effects and

the influence of extraneous variables (e.g. age differences, previous environmental activities

experiences) have resulted in these insignificant findings. These factors highlighted the

limitations of quantitative methods alone in examining this issue.

Conversely, many current researchers applied mixed methods (a combination of

quantitative and qualitative methods) to overcome these limitations (Dettmann-Easler &

Pease, 1999; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). The effectiveness of mixed methods in examining the

effect of ROE camps on the improvement of environmental attitudes is clear as most of the

studies reported more detailed information on study outcomes. It is proposed that mixed

method approaches minimise single methodological boundedness and allow deeper

understanding of these issues (further details of this method are discussed in the

Methodology Chapter).

The contribution of these studies to the development of various environmental

attitude instruments (e.g. NEP, MGOAI, and Camp Whitewood Survey Instruments) is

important. These instruments have been utilised by various researchers from time to time

and are proven as useful tools in assessing the impact of a ROE camp on the improvement

of environmental attitudes (Hollweg, 1997; Pelstring, 1997a, 1997b). A mixed method

approach and the MGOAI were chosen for this study in order to examine the effects of a

ROE on the improvement of environmental attitudes.


26

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

This chapter will discuss the methodology utilised in this study. The first section

outlines the research questions founding the study whilst the second section describes and

justifies the rationale of a mixed method approach. The third and fourth sections discuss the

quantitative and qualitative methods that were employed, the fifth section provides details

about the variables under investigation, and finally; the sixth section outlines the procedures

employed.

Research questions

In this study the researcher has applied both quantitative and qualitative methods in

order to answer the following questions:

1. Does a residential outdoor education camp cause a change in students’


2. If so, how are changes in environmental attitude influenced by the socio-demographic

variables of:

(a) gender


(c) environmental worldview (e.g. biocentric, ecocentric)



3. What elements of a residential outdoor education camp do the students perceive as


4. If changes take place, when and how do they occur?


27

Methodological rationale

Mixed methods are combination of quantitative and qualitative methods in order to

gain optimal useful data (Greene, 2001). This methods were chosen because they

“…generate insights that are deeper and broader, and … develop important knowledge

claims that respect a wider range of interests and perspectives” (Greene, 2001, p.251).

Furthermore, the mixed method provides rich data and minimises biases from a single

method approach (Creswell, 2003). Finally this approach provides holistic data interpretation,

which not only describes the effect but may also suggest the causes and elements of a

residential outdoor education (ROE) camp influencing the improvement of students’


A Concurrent Triangulation Strategy was selected, where the researcher used two

different methods to confirm, cross-validate or corroborate findings within a single study

(Creswell, 2003). In addition, Creswell reports that the data analysis process is not too

complicated, as the quantitative and qualitative data is processed separately. The researcher

utilised a combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods in order to gain as much

useful data as possible. The collection of data was concurrent and happened in a single

phase of the research study. The data was analysed separately using different analysis

techniques. Finally, results were compared in order to answer the research questions.

QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE

Data results compared

Quantitative data collection

1. Demographic questionnaire

2. Millward Ginter Outdoor

Attitude Inventory (MGOAI)

Qualitative data collection

1. Participants observation

2. Interviews

Quantitative data analysis 1. t-test

2. Mean comparison

3. Repeated Measure Analysis

of Variances (RM ANOVA)

4. Post Hoc Analysis

Qualitative data analysis 1. Constant comparative method

2. Categories

3. Trends

Figure 3: Concurrent Triangulation Strategy (Creswell, 2003)


28

Methods

As illustrated in Figure 3, this study used a combination of quantitative and qualitative

methods and instrumentation in data collection. Both of the methods will be described

separately in this section in order to gain a greater understanding of each, including their

respective uses in the study.

Quantitative methods

a. Underlying assumptions

Quantitative methods are based on the positivist paradigm, in which the researcher is

“…primarily interested in description, explanation, prediction, control, and verification of

cause and effect relationships” (Priest, 1999, p.310). Quantitative methods use “…a

deductive form of logic wherein theories and hypothesis are tested in a cause and effect

order [in order] to develop generalizations that contribute to the theory and enable one to

better predict, explain and understand some phenomenon” (Creswell, 1994, p.7).

This paradigm assumes knowledge is cumulative and can be broken down into parts in

order to generate new knowledge. The researcher separates himself/herself from the

knowledge, and normally the outcome(s) of the research are presented in statistical tables

and graphs (Baumgartner, Strong, & Hensen, 2002).

Based on the above assumptions, the researcher used quantitative methods in this

study in order to answer the following research questions:

1. Does a residential outdoor education camp cause a change in students’


2. If so, how are changes in environmental attitude influenced by the socio-demographic

variables of:

(a) gender


(c) environmental worldview (e.g. biocentric, ecocentric)



In examining these research questions, it was hypothesised that:

1. There will be statistically significance changes in students’ environmental

attitudes after participating in a ROE camp.


29

2. There will be statistically significance differences between boys and girls

environmental attitude levels after participating in a ROE camp.

3. There will be statistically significance differences between students with more

and less siblings’ environmental attitudes level after participating in ROE

camp.

4. There will be statistically significance influences from previous experiences in

outdoor and environmental activities on students’ environmental attitudes

changes after participating in a ROE camp.

5. There will be statistically significance differences between the students’

preferred recreational activities (consumptive, motorised, appreciative) on

environmental attitude changes after participating in a ROE camp.

6. There will be statistically significance differences between the students’

environmental worldview (biocentric, and ecocentric) and environmental

attitude changes after participating in a ROE camp.

b. Design

In order to answer the research questions, the present study utilised a one-group pre

and post-test design. This design includes a pre-test measure followed by a treatment, and a

post-test measure of a single group in order to answer the research questions. This design

was chosen because it measures environmental attitude changes over time through the pre

and post test scores comparison (Thomas & Nelson, 1999). Furthermore this design is

reliable in measuring either individual and/or whole group’s environmental attitude changes.

The major limitation of this design is that there is no control group and if environmental

attitude changes do occur, there is no strong evidence to link these changes with the camp

participation. In order to minimise this limitation, data was also collected through qualitative

method techniques, which will be discussed later in the qualitative methods section.

c. Instrumentation

A two-part survey instrument was used. The first asked demographic questions and

the second examined the student’s environmental attitudes level.

Students’ demographic inventory

Students were initially required to provide demographic and background information

including age, gender, place of residence, ethnic origin, preferred recreational activities, and

previous experience in outdoor and environmental activities. All of these variables are


30

important as they influence environmental attitudes (Fishbein, 1967, 1975), and they were

utilised to establish a background profile of the students.

Millward Ginter Outdoor Attitude Inventory (MGOAI)

The MGOAI was developed in 1973 to measure environmental attitudes. More

recently, it has been used in several studies of ROE programs (Christy, 1982; Mackay, 1981;

Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). Although there were other environmental attitude

questionnaires (e.g. New Environmental Paradigm (NEP), Camp Whitewood Survey), the

present study adopted MGOAI because it was designed for children between the ages of 9 to

14. In addition, this instrument is applicable to the residential camp environment and has

been applied in a New Zealand study (Mackay, 1981). Furthermore, the MGOAI was

developed to measure environmental attitude changes through pre and post-tests. It is an

easy paper and pencil questionnaire, is less time consuming and has reliability coefficients

that exceed 0.80 (Hollweg, 1997; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999).

Divided into four sub-scales, the MGOAI comprises 43 items with 21 positive and 22

negative statements. The pollution subscale comprised 10 statements about the depletion of

natural resources, such as the importance of soil conservation and pollution in home

environments and the outdoors. The environment subscale included 16 statements regarding

awareness or attitudes towards wildlife protection and an appreciation of streams, insects

and bush. Nine statements in the MGOAI comprised the learning subscale, which highlight

attitudes towards learning in the outdoors, the importance of environmental education in

school and the role of education in improving the environment. Finally, there are eight

statements in the social subscales that highlight the residential camp social life such as

friendships, teamwork and group planning.

For the purpose of this study, Mackay’s (1981) modified version of MGOAI was used

because it has been adapted to the New Zealand situation and has demonstrated reliability3.

Mackay discarded one of the original 43 items (about the camp communal meals) as there

was no communal cooking in some of the camps. Mackay also modified the wordings of

several items in order to make it more relevant to the New Zealand conditions. For example,

the word ‘forest’ was changed to ‘bush, and ‘snake’ changed to ‘spider’. Special phrases

such as ‘native bush’ were also introduced (see Appendix A).

The MGOAI uses the five point Likert response scale, where a score of 5 indicates a

strongly agree response, while a score on 1 indicates strongly disagree. The total scores

ranged from 42 to 210 points based on the 42 statements.

Score ranges Category

3 Mackay’s (1981) modified version of MGOAI recorded reliability coefficients of 0.65 for Standard Four (10 years) students, and 0.74 for Form Four (14 years).


31

189 to 210 points Very positive environmental attitudes

150 to 188 points Positive environmental attitudes

107 to 149 points Neutral or non-committal environmental attitudes

65 to 106 points Negative environmental attitudes

42 to 64 points Very negative environmental attitudes

Table 1: Millward Ginter Outdoor Attitude Inventory (MGOAI) rank order

Based on Table 1, students who scored from 189 to 210 on the MGOAI instruments

are predicted to have very positive environmental attitudes while any students who scored

between 42 to 64 points are predicted to have very negative environmental attitudes. Based

on all of the above justifications, it was proposed that the MGOAI was a suitable quantitative

instrument for this study.

d. Data analysis

All statistical analyses in this study were conducted using the Statistical Package for

the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 11.0, with a significance level of p <.05. There were two

main phases to the quantitative data analysis. Phase one used descriptive statistics in

determining the study hypothesis through t-tests and mean comparisons. The descriptive

statistics were also used to determine any differences between the pollution, environment,

learning, and social subscales. The total scores of MGOAI were calculated for each student

to determine the effect of the camp on individual environmental attitude changes.

In the second phase, the researcher used the Repeated Measures Analysis of

Variance (RM ANOVA – which uses a MANOVA process) and post hoc analysis in

determining the differences between variables (gender, number of siblings, environmental

worldviews, preferred recreational activities, and previous experiences in outdoor and

environmental education activities) on the improvement of environmental attitudes.

e. Limitations

This study was limited by the following factors:

1. The weakness of a quantitative methodology is that it cannot explore elements of the

camp that might have influenced the students’ environmental attitude changes.

2. Pre and post test design may expose to central tendency effects where the students

may try to score lower in the pre test in order to gain maximum changes in the post

test scores (Thomas and Nelson, 1999). To minimise this effect, no mention of the

post-test was made at the pre test session.


32

3. MGOAI is a proven measure of environmental attitudes and has been used in several

studies (e.g. Mackay, 1981; Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). By using the

MGOAI, the present study only measured the students’ environmental attitude

changes in this particular ROE camp.

4. The small sample population (n = 28) and purposive sampling procedure decreases

the generalisability of findings (Thomas & Nelson, 2001). Therefore the findings have

to be generalised with caution.

Qualitative methods

a. Underlying assumptions

In contrast with the positivist paradigm, qualitative methods are based on the

naturalistic paradigm. This paradigm accepts multiple realities and assumes that “realities

come from the arrangement of persons, objects, or events into meaningful patterns and

reality does not exist until it is perceived as such” (Priest, 1999, p.310). Based on this view,

the naturalistic paradigm views the researcher and the knowledge as interconnected and this

relationship influences the understanding of the knowledge.

Qualitative methods involve inductive processes, which provide “rich context-bound

information leading to patterns and theories that help explain a phenomenon” (Creswell,

1994, p.7). The outcomes are normally in words and inferred by the reader, influenced by

societal or cultural contexts, and presented in thick rich descriptions.

The main purpose of the qualitative methods in this study were to identify and

examine the students’ unique experiences of a ROE camp that might require greater

elaboration and depth of analysis (Mason, 2002). The main goal was to examine which

aspects or elements of a ROE camp may influence the environmental attitude change(s)

among the students. Based on these arguments, the researcher applied qualitative methods

to specifically answer the following research questions:

1. What elements of a residential outdoor education camp do the students

perceive as influencing their environmental attitudes?

2. If changes take place, when and how do they occur?

b. Qualitative measures

Participant observation and interview approaches were chosen to investigate these

issues, due to their ability to provide an in-depth understanding of the students’ behaviour,

thoughts and feelings (Robson, 2002). These approaches were particularly appropriate for

this study as they enabled the researcher to openly search for patterns and in-depth ideas


33

from the data rather than being forced to stay within the confines of a predetermined

hypothesis (Hammersley, 1996).

Participant observation

Participant observation is a qualitative data collection technique in which the

researcher takes part and is immersed in the natural research setting (DePoy & Gitlin, 1998).

Based on this underpinning, the researcher participated as an observer during the camp

programme, where he was involved in every activity and the camp community knew his

various roles. This technique provided the researcher with firsthand experiences by building

rapport with the students and allowing the exploration of visual information such as personal

behaviour that may be uncomfortable for students to discuss (Lee, 2000). In applying this

technique, the researcher was also alert to the fact that his involvement may create a sense

of unpleasantness and rejection among the camp community. The probability of this situation

was minimised through developing a good relationship with the key person (the classroom

teacher) and building a good rapport with the other participants.

All of the situations observed in the camp settings were recorded in field notes. Field

notes are “…written accounts of what the researcher sees, hears, experiences and thinks

about in the course of collecting data” (Baumgartner et al., 2002, p.216). In this study, field

notes were written in a small notebook during each programmes break in order to avoid the

risk of depending too much on long term memories (DePoy & Gitlin, 1998). Using keywords,

the field notes were written in isolation to avoid influencing the students’ attitudes towards the

researcher (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). As soon as was appropriate, the keywords were written

and expanded to create a field notes journal. The field notes were analysed intensively by

the researcher after the camp.

Interview

Interviews were used in order to gain rich qualitative data. This process occurred in

two phases. The first phase involved an interview with one on one or individuals. An

individual interview was conducted in the first phase because it allowed the researcher to

gain personal insights from the students (Punch, 2002). These personal insights were

important to determine the camp elements that may influence the improvement of

environmental attitudes for each interviewee. Although the students may have felt shy or

nervous in the early stages of the interview, the researcher’s rapport and interviewing skills

may have minimised these problems (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998).

A group interview involving the same students was utilised in the second phase. This

interviewing technique was selected because it involved interaction among the students, and

this helped develop data quality. Furthermore, it was more enjoyable and less formal than

the individual interviews.


34

During the interview the researcher experienced power struggles and passive

participation from some of the interviewees. These situations were minimised by encouraging

all students to state their views and asking direct questions to the specific students (Maykut

& Morehouse, 1994).

The interview schedule that was used in this study is comprised of six main questions

that were based on the findings of previous studies.

1. What are the students’ previous outdoor and environmental education

experiences?

2. What do the students perceive the camp learning outcomes to be?

3. What are the effects of the camp on environmental attitudes?

4. If environmental attitude improvement does occur, what are the main

influential elements?

5. When and how do these improvement processes take place?

6. What are the best approaches to minimise environmental problems in this

modern world?

For further details on the interview questions, please refer to Appendix B.

The interviews were conducted with three students, a teacher and a parent during

and after the camp. The details of the interviews are listed in Table 2.

Respondents No. Time Location

Teacher 1 Last day of camp Camp cabin

Parent 1 Last day of camp Camp cabin

Students 3 After post test School

Group of students 1 After post test and first interview School

Table 2: In-depth interview details

A teacher and parent were interviewed in order to gain useful data about the students

and the camp programme from an alternative perspective. It was conducted at the end of the

camp in order to gain maximum insights from the respondents. The students’ interviews were

conducted three days after the camp during school time to allow time for the students to

reflect on their experiences.

The qualitative method of the study used a purposive sampling technique where the

researcher selected a few students whom he thought could provide useful data and

information for the study (Thomas & Nelson, 2001). The parent respondent was selected on

a volunteer and first come basis. The school’s outdoor education Head of Department was

interviewed because she was the key person in designing the camp programmes.


35

c. Qualitative data analysis

Qualitative data in the present study comprised of participant observation and in-

depth interview data. Participant observation data was written in field notes which was

analysed intensively by the researcher after the camp.

All interviews were tape recorded and then transcribed verbatim. This technique has

many advantages, including providing data that is rich in nature, allowing the opportunity to

review as often as necessary, and providing the opportunity for reliability checks (Taylor &

Bogdan, 1998). The data was analysed in a Constant Comparative Method based on the

interview question categories (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994). A Constant Comparative Method

is a qualitative analysis technique where the data is analysed based on its themes, and

categories (Patton, 1990). The data was then coded and divided into meaningful units of

analysis, where similar themes were grouped together and categorised (Ryan & Bernard,

2000). All identified categories were then judged according to their similarity in order to

ensure that the units in a particular category are similar to each other, and distinct from those

of other categories (Patton, 1990). This was done to provide a wide view from each

respondent about the elements of ROE camp that may influence their environmental

attitudes. Finally specific themes from each interview were written into thematic case reports.

d. Researcher’s background

The researcher is a Master’s student studying outdoor education at the University of

Otago. He is an Asian male who earned a Bachelor of Education in Sports Science in 1999

from the University Pendidikan of Sultan Idris, Malaysia. The researcher has a range of

experience leading outdoor education programmes in Malaysia. Although still new to the

New Zealand outdoor education environment, he has participated in numerous Otago

University School of Physical Education outdoor practicals (e.g. Nordic skiing, kayaking,

tramping, surfing, and orienteering). It was within these experiences that the researcher

made direct contact with the students while in the camp. The researcher is also aware of the

influence that he might have on this study (e.g. personal environmental views and cultural

differences), and recorded and illustrated those influences in his reflective journal.

e. Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness is an important factor in establishing the credibility of the study.

Robson (2002) highlighted the importance of establishing trustworthiness in qualitative

research, especially in persuading the readers that the findings are worthy of their attention.

Trustworthiness is underpinned by four main concerns that require addressing: (1) credibility;


36

(2) transferability; (3) dependability, and; (4) conformability (Patton, 1990; Taylor & Bogdan,

1998).

Credibility

Credibility refers to the truth-value and accuracy of the findings in qualitative inquiry

(DePoy & Gitlin, 1998). In order to maintain credibility in this study, a peer debriefing

technique was applied. Peer debriefing is “one technique to ensure that data analysis

represents the phenomena under investigation with the use of more than one investigator as

a participant in the analytical process” (De Poy & Gitlin, 1998, p.222).

The purpose of this process is for a disinterested but knowledgeable person to

critically assess the researcher’s study process. In this study, the peer debriefer was a fellow

postgraduate student at the School of Physical Education who is familiar with qualitative

methods of research. Meetings were held weekly over the investigation period, and monthly

for the rest of the study period to discuss the study’s process. The peer debriefer did not take

any other part in this study.

Triangulation techniques were also utilised in the study. Triangulation is where “one

source of information is checked against one or more other different types of sources to

determine the accuracy of hypothetical understandings” (De Poy & Gitlin, 1998, p.284). The

researcher triangulated the data that was collected through observation, and the in depth

interviews in order to provide credibility to the data. By applying this technique, the

researcher was able to develop a more comprehensive analytical understanding of the

phenomenon in the camp setting.

Transferability

Transferability is “the counterpart to internal validity [and] addresses whether the

outcomes identified are interpretable” (Priest, 1999, p.312); and relevant to other readers’

situations. Thus, in this study, the researcher provides detailed descriptions of the data

collection and analysis procedures in order to allow the reader to conclude whether the study

is relevant to their personal context.

Dependability and conformability

In order to ensure dependability and conformability of the study, the researcher used

an audit trail and reflective journal. An audit trail is a path of a person’s thinking and action

processes that enables others to follow the logic and manner in which knowledge was

developed (DePoy & Gitlin, 1998). In order to ensure the dependability and conformability of

this study, an auditor (a person not involved in this study) examined the whole process of

inquiry to ensure that the study was logical and coherent (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994). The


37

auditor of this investigation is a physical education lecturer at the University of Otago who

has previous experience in qualitative research methods and designs.

The researcher wrote a reflective journal throughout the research process to enable

the communication of his personal thoughts, insights, and perceptions. This journal became

useful in analysing meanings, while also allowing an outsider to gain the perspectives of the

researcher. Outsiders can also use the journal as audit trail to observe whether the

researcher is making insightful relationships between the participants and their meanings.

f. Ethical procedures

An application for ethical consideration of research of human participants was lodged

and approved by the University of Otago Ethics Committee (see Appendix C).

g. Predicted outcomes

The researcher hypothesised that the ROE camp could influence the improvement of

the students’ environmental attitudes. If improvement occurs, this research endeavoured to

uncover the elements of a ROE camp that may have influenced the students’ environmental

attitudes. These findings may facilitate a better environmental education focus in outdoor

education programming.

The research group

In this study, the researcher used purposive sampling techniques, “…where the

researcher knows that specific characteristics exist in a certain segment of a population”

(Baumgartner et al., 2002, p.133). Also known as judgmental sampling, this technique

involves a selection of a certain group from which the researcher could best answer the

research questions.

A number of researchers have highlighted the influence of age and previous

experience on environmental attitude development and changes (Eagles & Demare, 1999;

Leberman, 1989; Shepard & Speelman, 1986). These researchers proposed that

environmental attitudes were developed through early ages (between 2 to 16 years) and

strongly influenced by the level of participation in outdoor and environmental education

activities. Several others believed that young people are more open to responding to the

environmental attitudes questionnaire (Bogner, 1998; Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt et al.,

1999). Based on these arguments, the sample in this study was selected based on the

following criteria:

1. Boys and girls aged between 11 to 13 years old at the time of the study.

2. Studying in the same class for at least one year.


38

3. Currently participating together in a school’s ROE camp.

The school

The school is located in the South Island of New Zealand and was established in the

early 1970’s. As an intermediate school, the students originally came from 10 different

primary schools. At the time of the study, the enrolment was 491 students and they formed

eight Year Seven, and seven Year Eight classes. The school is ranked ninth on the deciles

rating which is an indicator of a high-income school community.

The school was selected for a number of reasons. Firstly, the students’ ages were

relevant to the focus of this study. In addition, the school management board held good

relationships with the university and were willingly to participate in this study. Furthermore, it

had a well-established outdoor education programme and was about to deliver an annual

ROE camp at a camp within the researcher’s travelling distance.

Participants

The participants for this study came from a class of Year Eight students in the school.

There were 28 students in total, comprising 13 boys and 15 girls with ages ranging from 11

to 13 years old. Within this age group, it was expected that the students were capable of

providing useful data in the interview sessions, which was important in examining the camp’s

elements contributing to environmental attitudes.

The school’s outdoor education programmes

The school has maintained a well-established outdoor education programme for over

twenty-five years. There are specific outdoor education programmes in each term which

involve ROE camps, winter tramping, orienteering and kayaking (see Appendix D). In the first

term of Year Seven, all classes attend a day camp, in which the main focus is building social

integration through tramping, outdoor games and local coastal studies. Students also

participate in a winter tramp, orienteering and kayaking activities later in the year.

In Year Eight, the students are exposed to longer outdoor education activities, such

as their four-day ROE camp at a location near the city. The main purpose of this camp is to

develop basic outdoor pursuit and safety skills. Typical activities are tramping, swimming,

river crossing, cooperative games and bush craft activities. Several weeks prior to the camp,

topics in outdoor and environmental education (e.g. safety, minimal impact camping,

environmental care code) and outdoor skills (e.g. outdoor cooking, river crossing) are

integrated into the classroom-learning situation. These integrations are to develop basic


39

environmental knowledge and camping skills. In the following school terms, students

participated in kayaking, winter tramp and orienteering activities. Other than outdoor pursuit

activities, outdoor education practices are also integrated and implemented into the school’s

curricula via subjects such as Physical Education, Science and Social Studies.

Setting

This four-day camp was organised in a residential camp located within 15 minutes

drive of the city. The camp is surrounded by pine trees and native bush with a small stream

flowing through the area. The camp had a basic infrastructure such as a hall, cabins and

toilets. Outdoor activity facilities included a large playing field, a high rope course and a 1.5

kilometre tramping track through native bush. There too were lots of flat, open areas adjacent

to the camp that created a definite ‘rural’ atmosphere.

In this ROE camp programme, the students were exposed to a variety of activities

and challenges such as night tramping, swimming, bushwalking, a police dog demonstration

and environmental study games. The details of the programmes are listed in Appendix E. In

developing self-responsibility, the students cooked their own meals and slept in tents. Other

activities were focused on social and personal development and outdoor skills. Three

teachers and four parents supported the camp programme. They were the school outdoor

education head of department, a class teacher, a volunteer teacher and parent volunteers.

Study procedure

a. Initial contact

The school was contacted first by telephone and then with a formal letter that

explained the purpose of the study and requested assistance in carrying it out (see Appendix

F). Three forms accompanied the letter: (1) school principal’s consent form; (2) parental

consent form; and (3) student consent form. A meeting was arranged with the classroom

teacher to discuss about the purpose and the process of the study. Once permission was

granted by the school and the class teacher, information sheets and consent forms were

distributed to the students. The class teacher collected the consent forms before the

administration of the pre-test.

b. Administering pre test

After obtaining informed consent from both parents and participants, a pre test

session was arranged by the researcher with the class three days before the camp. The test


40

was conducted in the classroom setting. Before conducting the pre test, the students were

reminded of the purpose of the study and that their participation was voluntary. The

researcher then explained the procedures for the questionnaires. Then, all of the participants

were requested to answer the questionnaire according to what they thought the best answer

was, and were reminded that their answers were confidential.

The researcher was present to answer any queries from the participants. All of the

questionnaires were gathered and stored securely after the test.

c. Camp participation and observation

The researcher participated in the camp as a teacher helper, and so became involved

in all camp activities. The researcher observed students’ environmental behaviours and

responses towards both camp activities and the natural surroundings. These two approaches

were chosen to foster a deeper understanding of students’ environmental attitudes level and

their perception of outdoor education activities.

The researcher also facilitated an environmental games session on the third day of

the camp. The activities in the session were as follows:

1. Human camera

This activity aims to develop environmental awareness and earth stewardship. In

pairs they acted as a camera in identifying a tree.

2. Tree hugging,

The objectives of tree hugging activity were to develop environmental awareness,

earth stewardships and sensory awareness. Through this activity, a partner guided a

blindfolded student to touch and / or smell a tree. The blindfold was taken off and the

student must find the tree again.

3. Nature alphabets

This activity attempted to enhance students’ knowledge of natural plants by getting

them to find natural objects that start with various letters that make a meaningful word

(e.g. N, A, T, U, R, A, L).

4. Mini national park

This activity aimed to develop the students’ sense of place and emphasises the

importance of the environment. The students had to find a specific place in the bush

and create their own mini national park. They also had to identify the uniqueness of

their park and design at least four environmental signs on a mini flag provided by the

researcher.

(See Appendix G for further details of these activities)

These activities were selected because they have been identified as effective in

enhancing environmental awareness and been widely used in environmental


41

education programmes (Cornell, 1989; Malore, 1999). Furthermore, they involved

direct interaction between the students and the environment and have proven

effective in developing first hand and long lasting learning experiences

(Hammermann et al., 2001). Based on these justifications the researcher believed

that these activities are reliable in directing students’ attention to the natural

environment and enhanced their awareness.

d. Teacher and parent interviews

Twenty to thirty minute interviews were conducted with the teacher and the parent on

the last day of the camp. An interview guide comprising a series of open-ended questions

was developed for this study (see Appendix H and I).

e. Administering post-test

A post-test was conducted back in the classroom setting three days after the

completion of the camp. Students were once again told of their rights, in relation to

participation and responding procedures to the questionnaire. All of the participants were

then requested to answer the questionnaire as accurately and truthfully as possible. All of the

questionnaires were collected by the researcher and stored securely.

f. Student interviews

The student interviews were conducted in the school computer room after the post-

test. Before commencing the interview, the researcher reviewed the information sheet and

consent forms with participants, emphasising their confidentiality and right to withdraw. The

participants were told that there were no right or wrong answers and that they should attempt

to respond to the interview questions as honestly as possible. These face-to-face interviews

lasted between 20 to 30 minutes. After individual interviews the students participated in the

group interview, which also lasted between 20 to 30 minutes. Interview guides comprising a

series of open-ended questions were developed for both of these interviews.


42

CHAPTER 4

QUANTITATIVE RESULTS

The quantitative results were drawn from the data in the Demographic and Millward-

Ginter Outdoor Attitude Inventory’s (MGOAI) survey of 28 students (15 girls and 13 boys)

who participated in a residential outdoor education (ROE) camp. The data was entered into

the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 11-computer program. Data was

checked for input accuracy and descriptive statistics were generated to check normality and

data frequencies.

Because of the relatively small number of participants (n=28), several items in the

demographic survey were recoded to form smaller groups [(1) worldviews – from three

categories (anthropocentric, biocentric, ecocentric) to two categories4 (biocentric, ecocentric);

(2) number of siblings – from four categories (none, 1 to 2, 3 to 5, more than 5) to two

categories (1 to 2, more than 2); and (3) previous experiences – from four categories (never,

1 to 4 times, 5 to 9 times, more than 10 times) to three categories (less, moderate, more)].

The other four items; [(1) age - 92 percent aged 12 years, less than 4 percent aged 11 and

13 years; (2) ethnicity – 86 percent New Zealand European, less than 14 percent are Maori

and Pacific Islander; (3) place of residence – 90 percent lived in urban, less than 10 percent

lived in rural; and (4) parents job – 90 percent employed, less than 8 percent are

unemployed] were not included as variables in the parametric analyses because they did not

have normal distributions. 4 As there were only one respondent in the anthropocentric mode, this person was recorded biocentric. Both modes have a similar view of manipulating the environment for further human purposes.


43

Research question 1

Does a residential outdoor education (ROE) camp cause a change in students’


Overall results

Table 3 presents results from the Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (RM

ANOVA) comparing MGOAI with pre and post-test scores which indicated statistically

significant findings (F (1,27) = 43.882, p < .01). Before camp, the score ranged from 127 to

177 with a raw mean score of 153.6 (x = 3.656). This score indicated that most students

already held positive attitudes towards the outdoors and the environment (see MGOAI rank

order table in the Methodology Chapter, page 31). After the completion of the camp, the

scores ranged from 145 to 184 with a raw mean score of 164 (x = 3.911). This 10-point

increment showed that the students’ environmental attitudes improved, thus the first

hypothesis which stated there will be statistically significance changes in students’

environmental attitudes after participating in a ROE camp was supported by the data.

Table 3: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI pre and post-test

Scores

Results RM ANOVA n x sd f Sig.

Pre test 28 3.656 .259 43.882 .000

Post test 28 3.911 .336

The rank order of environmental attitudes

According to MGOAI Rank Order, score ranges from 189 to 210 indicate very positive

environmental attitudes, 150 to 188 indicate positive environmental attitudes, 107 to 149

infdicate neutral environmental attitudes, 65 to 106 indicate negative environmental attitudes,

and 42 to 64 indicate very negative environmental attitudes.

Figure 4 shows that before the camp, 32 percent (n = 9) of the students held neutral

or non-committal environmental attitudes (score range between 107 to 149), while the other

68 percent (n= 19) held positive environmental attitudes (score range between 150 – 188).

After the camp, there was a 16 percent increase in students with positive environmental

attitudes (n = 24), while the students with neutral or non-committal attitudes decreased to

only 14 percent (n = 4). These findings indicated that most of the students had significantly

improved their environmental attitudes by the completion of the camp.

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

enta

ge

neutral, 107 - 149

positive, 150 - 188


44

Figure 4: The rank percentages of students’ environmental attitudes before

and after the camp

In Table 4 the results of the RM ANOVA comparing the MGOAI subscales with pre

and post test scores also indicated statistically significant findings. The highest significant

result was recorded in the pollution subscale (F(1, 27) = 34.448, p < .01), followed by

environment (F(1,27) = 23.566, p < .01), learning (F(1,27) = 21.515, p < .01), and social

subscales (F(1,27) = 5.488, p < .05). These findings indicated that the camp resulted in

statistically significant improvement in all of the subscales.

Table 4: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI subscales with pre and

post-test scores

Pre Test Post Test RM ANOVA

n x sd n x sd f Sig.

1 Environment subscale 28 3.743 .396 28 3.973 .410 23.566 .001

2 Pollution subscale 28 3.592 .348 28 3.925 .431 34.448 .001

3 Social subscale 28 3.530 .434 28 3.709 .437 5.488 .027

4 Learning subscale 28 3.646 .355 28 3.944 .489 21.515 .001

In the pre test, the mean score for the environment subscale was 3.743 and it was

0.23 higher (x = 3.973) in the post-test. The pollution subscale recorded a mean score of

3.592 in the pre test and recorded an increase of 0.33 (x = 3.925) in the post- test. The social

subscale mean score was 3.530 in the pre test and it recorded an increase of 0.18 (x =

3.709) in the post-test. Finally, the learning subscale pre test score was 3.646 and recorded

an increase of 0.30 (x = 3.944) in the post-test.

Figure 5: Mean comparison between MGOAI total and subscales score in the

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Tot al Environment Pollut ion Social Learning

Total and Subscales

Mea

n Pr e test

Post test


45

pre and post-tests

Research question 2

Socio-demographic influences on the development of students’ environmental attitudes

In determining the socio-demographic factors that may influence the development of

environmental attitudes among the students, a RM ANOVA was conducted with gender,

number of siblings, previous experience, worldview and preferred recreational activity

variables as the independent variables. The results only indicated statistically significant

differences for gender.

Gender

A paired sample t-test was conducted to examine the effects of the camp on the level

of environmental attitudes for boys and girls. It was found that the camp resulted in

statistically significant improvement for boys (t = -3.261, df = 12, p = .007); and girls (t = -

6.460, df = 14, p = .001). These results indicated that the camp created statistically

significant improvement for both sexes.

Results for the RM ANOVA (see Table 5) which comparing the MGOAI pre test score

for gender, indicated that the girls scored higher (x = 3.736) than the boys (x = 3.564) with p

= .079 (approaching significance). By the end of the camp, there were statistically significant

differences in environmental attitude scores between genders (F(1,27) = 5.626, p <.05)

where girls once again scored significantly higher (x = 4.041) than boys (x = 3.761). Thus,

the hypothesis 2 (a) which stated there will be statistically significant differences between

girls and boys environmental attitudes level after participating in a ROE camp was supported

by the data.


scores by gender

Boy Girl RM ANOVA

n x sd n x sd f Sig.

1 Pre test 13 3.564 .291 15 3.736 .205 3.332 .079

Post test 13 3.761 .379 15 4.041 .235 5.626 .025

2 Environment pre test 13 3.644 .391 15 3.829 .393 1.546 .225

Environment post test 13 3.774 .041 15 4.145 .344 6.926 .014

3 Pollution pre test 13 3.623 .412 15 3.566 .294 .177 .677

Pollution post test 13 3.907 .520 15 3.940 .356 .038 .848

4 Social pre test 13 3.395 .448 15 3.647 .399 2.471 .128

Social post test 13 3.626 .516 15 3.781 .357 .866 .361


46

5 Learning pre test 13 3.453 .404 15 3.814 .195 9.493 .005

Learning post test 13 3.683 .545 15 4.170 .296 8.918 .006

A RM ANOVA was also conducted to examine gender differences in the MGOAI

subscale scores. In the pre test there were statistically significant differences in the learning

subscale (F(1,27) = 3.814, p <.01), where girls scored higher (x = 3.814) than boys (x =

3.453). There were no significant differences in the other three subscales (p pollution = .677,

p social = .128, p environment = .225)

In the post-test, there were significant gender differences in environment

(F(1,27) = 6.926, p <.05) and learning subscales (F(1,27) = 8.918, p <.01). In both of these

subscales, girls scored higher (x environment = 4.145, x learning = 4.170) than boys (x

environment = 3.774, x learning = 3.683). There were no significant differences on the other

two subscales (p pollution = .624, p social = .837).

In the pre test, girls recorded higher scores in environment, social and learning, while

boys were higher in pollution subscales. By the end of the camp, girls scored higher than

boys in all of the subscales (see Figure 7). These results indicated that girls recorded greater

improvement than boys in all of the subscales after the camp.

Figure 6: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post test scores,

by gender

Number of siblings

Results from the RM ANOVA (see Table 6) which comparing the MGOAI pre and

post-test scores between numbers of siblings (students with one or two siblings, students

with more than two) indicated statistically insignificant findings (p pre test = .138, p post-test

= .701), and thus hypothesis 2 (b) which stated that there will be significant environmental

attitudes differences between students with less siblings and students with more siblings was

not supported.

In comparing the pre and post tests mean scores between these two groups, it was

found that students with more than two siblings scored slightly higher (x pre = 3.754, x post =

3.945) than the students with less siblings (x pre = 3.601, x post = 3.892).

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Total Environment Pollution Social Learning

Total and Scubscales

Mea

n

Boy pre test

Boy post test

Girl pre test

Girl post test


47


scores, by number of siblings

1 to 2 More than 2 RM ANOVA n x sd n x sd f Sig.

1 Pre test 18 3.601 .263 10 3.754 .232 2.337 .138

Post test 18 3.892 .340 10 3.945 .343 .151 .701

2 Environment pre test 18 3.708 .388 10 3.806 .423 .383 .541

Environment post test 18 3.923 .360 10 4.062 .497 .727 .402

3 Pollution pre test 18 3.566 .375 10 3.640 .306 .277 .603


4 Social pre test 18 3.444 .464 10 3.685 .342 2.060 .163

Social post test 18 3.722 .519 10 3.685 .250 .043 .837


Learning post test 18 3.901 .502 10 4.022 .479 .385 .541

A RM ANOVA was conducted to examine group differences in MGOAI pre and post-

tests subscale scores. In the pre test, there were statistically significant differences in the

learning subscale (F(1,27) = 4.906, p <.05). Students with more than two siblings scored

significantly higher (x = 3.833) than students who have fewer siblings (x = 3.543). There were

no significant differences in the other three subscales. In post- test, there were no significant

differences between these groups in all MGOAI subscale scores.

A mean comparison was conducted to identify score differences between groups. In

the pre test, students with more than two siblings recorded slightly higher mean score in all of

the subscales (see Table 6). However these results changed in the post-test, where the

students with fewer siblings scored slightly higher in the pollution (x = 3.995) and social (x =

3.722) subscales than the other group (x pollution = 3.870, x social = 3.685).

Figure 7: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post-test scores,

by number of siblings

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5


Total and Subscales

Mea

n

Less siblings pre

Less siblings post

More siblings pre

More siblings post


48

Worldviews

The students’ worldviews were divided into two groups: (1) biocentric – the group of

students who believed the environment should be managed in order to further human

purposes, and; (2) ecocentric – the group of students who believed humans and the

environment are equally important, and that each should take care of the other. In Table 7,

results from the RM ANOVA comparing MGOAI scores with the student’s worldviews

indicated statistically insignificant findings in both pre (p = .445) and post tests (p = .308),

and thus the hypothesis 2 (c) which stated that there will be statistically significance

differences between the students environmental worldviews (biocentric, ecocentric) and

environmental attitudes changes after participating in a ROE camp, was not supported.

Through mean comparison it was found that the ecocentric group recorded slightly

higher scores in pre (x = 3.689) and post-tests (x = 3.968) than the biocentric group (x pre =

3.613, x post = 3.835).

A RM ANOVA was conducted to examine worldview differences in the MGOAI

subscale scores. Overall there were no statistically significant differences between group pre

and post-test scores across all of the subscales (all p >.05). In the pre test, the ecocentric

group scored slightly higher in the pollution (x = 3.656), social (x = 3.958) and learning

subscales (x = 3.708) than the biocentric group (x pollution = 3.508, x social = 3.440, x

learning = 3.453). The biocentric group only recorded slightly higher scores in the

environment subscale (x = 3.770) than the ecocentric group (x = 3.722).

In the post-test, the ecocentric group recorded slightly higher score in environment (x

= 4.066), pollution (x = 3.987) and learning subscales (x = 3.843) than the biocentric group (x

environment = 3.849, x pollution = 3.841, x learning = 3.842). The biocentric group recorded

slightly higher scores only in the social subscale (x = 3.785). Details of these findings are

illustrated in Figure 7.


scores, by worldviews

Biocentric Ecocentric RM ANOVA

n m sd n m sd f Sig.

1 Pre test 12 3.613 .251 16 3.689 .269 .576 .445

Post test 12 3.835 .315 16 3.968 .350 1.082 .308

2 Environment pre test 12 3.770 .289 16 3.722 .469 .098 .757

Environment post test 12 3.849 .312 16 4.066 .458 1.991 .170

3 Pollution pre test 12 3.508 .365 16 3.656 .332 1.247 .274


4 Social pre test 12 3.440 .362 16 3.598 .481 .901 .351

Social post test 12 3.785 .549 16 3.651 .337 .635 .433


49


Learning post test 12 3.842 .343 16 4.020 .574 .908 .349


by worldviews

Preferred recreational activities

The students’ preferred recreational activities were divided into three groups: (1)

motorised, (2) consumptive, and (3) appreciative. Results from the RM ANOVA (see Table 8)

which comparing the MGOAI pre and post-test scores between the groups indicates

statistically insignificant differences (p pre test = .487, p post-test = .630). Thus, the 2 (d)

hypothesis which stated that there will be statistically significance differences between the

students preferred recreational activities on environmental attitudes changes after

participating in a ROE camp was not supported.

In comparing the pre test mean score between groups, it was found that the

appreciative group recorded slightly higher score (x=3.714) than the consumptive (x = 3.636)

and motorised (x = 3.583), groups. However these findings changed in the post-test where

the consumptive group scored higher (x = 4.00) than the appreciative (x = 3.943) and

motorised (x = 3.831), groups.


scores, by preferred recreational activities

Motorised Consumptive Appreciative RM ANOVA

n m sd n m sd n m sd f Sig.

1 Pre test 10 3.583 .218 4 3.636 .267 14 3.714 .287 .740 .487

Post test 10 3.831 .325 4 4.000 .284 14 3.943 .366 .471 .630

2 Environment pre test 10 3.481 .337 4 3.796 .267 14 3.915 .381 4.436 .022

Environment post test 10 3.800 .311 4 4.031 .373 14 4.080 .463 1.452 .253

3 Pollution pre test 10 3.650 .374 4 3.600 .476 14 3.550 .313 .227 .798

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5


Total and Subscales

Mea

n

Biocentric pre

Biocentric post

Ecocentric pre

Ecocentric post


50

Pollution post test 10 3.950 .406 4 4.125 .368 14 3.850 .471 .640 .536

4 Social pre test 10 3.685 .498 4 3.285 .285 14 3.489 .402 1.371 .272

Social post test 10 3.785 .560 4 3.678 .357 14 3.663 .378 .226 .779

5 Learning pre test 10 3.555 .391 4 3.666 .351 14 3.706 .342 .513 .605

Learning post test 10 3.788 .618 4 4.055 .430 14 4.023 .399 .781 .469

A RM ANOVA was conducted to examine group differences in the MGOAI subscale

scores. In the pre test, only the environment subscale recorded statistically significant

findings (F(2, 25) = 4.436, p < .05) where the appreciative group scored significantly higher

(x = 3.915) than the consumptive (x = 3.636) and motorised (x = 3.481), groups. However,

there were no statistically significant differences in the environment subscale post-test

scores. All of the groups recorded improvement, where the appreciative group still recorded

the highest score (x= 4.080) followed by the consumptive (x= 4.031) and motorised (x =

3.800), groups. These findings indicated that by the end of the camp, the entire group

recorded small score improvement in the environment subscale.

In comparing the pre test result across all of the subscales, it was found that the

appreciative group scored higher in the environment (x = 3.915) and learning subscales (x =

3.706), while the motorised group in other two subscales (x pollution = 3.650, x social =

3.685).

The post-test results were more diverse. The appreciative group only scored higher in

environment (x = 4.080), while the motorised group in social (x = 3.785) and consumptive

group in pollution (x = 4.125) and learning (x = 4.055) subscales.

Figure 9: Mean comparison between MGOAI pre and post test scores,

by preferred recreational activities


The students’ level of previous experiences was divided into three groups: (1) less;

(2) moderate, and (3) more experience. Results from the RM ANOVA Results from the RM

ANOVA (see Table 9) which comparing the MGOAI pre and post-test scores between the

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5


Total and Subscales

Mea

n

Motorised preMotorised postConsumptive preConsumptive postAppreciative preAppreciative post


51

levels of experiences indicated statistically insignificant differences (p pre test = .322, p post-

test = .132). Thus, the 2 (e) hypothesis which stated there will be statistically significance

influences of previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities on

students environmental attitude changes after participating in a ROE camp was not

supported.

In comparing the mean score between the groups, students with more experience

recorded slightly higher scores in pre (x=3.839) and post-test (x = 4.214) than the moderate

(x pre = 3.634, x post = 3.863) and less experienced (x pre = 3.617, x post = 3.859), groups.

However these findings have to be treated with caution because of the small population size

(n = 4) in this group.

A RM ANOVA was conducted to examine the students’ experience levels with the

MGOAI subscale scores. In the pre test, the social subscale approached significant level (p =

.054) where the students with more experience scored higher (x = 4.00) than the moderate (x

= 3.416) and less experienced (x = 3.488), groups. There were no significant differences in

the other three subscales (all p >.05).

In the post-test there were statistically significant differences in the social subscale

(F(2,25) = 4.107, p <.05), where the students with more experience scored higher (x = 4.107)

than the moderate (x = 3.511) and less (x = 3.773) experienced. There were no significant

differences in the other three subscales (all p >.05).


scores, by the level of experience

Low Experience Moderate Experience More Experience RM ANOVA

n x sd n x sd n x sd f Sig.

1 Pre test 12 3.617 .259 12 3.634 .247 4 3.839 .289 1.186 .322

Post test 12 3.859 .369 12 3.863 .315 4 4.214 .101 2.035 .152

2 Environment pre test 12 3.724 .396 12 3.703 .381 4 3.921 .503 .462 .635

Environment post test 12 3.916 .440 12 3.927 .391 4 4.281 .312 1.347 .278

3 Pollution pre test 12 3.516 .338 12 3.625 .381 4 3.725 .298 .607 .553

Pollution post test 12 3.875 .455 12 3.900 .469 4 4.150 .173 .626 .543

4 Social pre test 12 3.488 .357 12 3.416 .489 4 4.000 .000 3.278 .054

Social post test 12 3.773 .341 12 3.511 .445 4 4.107 .426 3.585 .043

5 Learning pre test 12 3.583 .385 12 3.675 .365 4 3.750 .262 .382 .686

Learning post test 12 3.805 .586 12 3.981 .420 4 4.250 .189 1.331 .282

The students with more experience also recorded slightly higher in pre and post-test

scores across all of the MGOAI subscales than the students with moderate and less

experience (see Table 9). However these findings have to once again be treated with

caution due to the small population size (n = 4).


52


by the level of experience

The influences of modes of experience on environmental attitudes

The level of experience variable is a combination of students’ previous experiences in

camping, environmental activities, watching television, reading magazines, surfing the

internet and involvement in social activities. A RM ANOVA was conducted between these

activities with the variable of gender, number of siblings, worldviews and preferred

recreational activities to identify their influences on the students’ environmental attitudes.

Modes of experience and gender

As demonstrated in Table 10, it was found that girls environmental attitudes were

statistically significant, as influenced by surfing the internet (F(1,27) = 8.726, p <.01),

participating in society environmental activities (F(1,27) = 8.122, p<.01), and reading

environmental magazines (F(1,27) = 5.864, p <.05). There were no statistically significant

influences of the other activities.

Table 10: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing modes of experience and gender

Boy Girl RM ANOVA

n M sd n m sd f Sig.

1 Camping 13 1.846 .800 15 1.666 .899 .307 .585

2 In nature with family 13 1.461 .776 15 1.933 .883 2.219 .148

3 Television 13 1.692 .751 15 2.000 .534 1.592 .218

4 Magazines 13 1.230 .599 15 1.933 .883 5.864 .023

5 Internet 13 1.230 .438 15 1.733 .457 8.726 .007

6 Social activities 13 1.461 .660 15 2.066 .457 8.122 .008

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Tot al Environment Pollut ion Social Learning

Total and Subscales

Mea

n

Less exp. preLess exp. postMed.exp.preMed.exp.postHigh exp. preHigh exp. post


53

Figure 11: Mean comparison between modes of experience and gender

Modes of experience and number of siblings

A RM ANOVA was conducted between modes of experience with students with more

and fewer siblings to identify which activities have a strong influence on environmental

attitudes.

As shown in Table 11, it was found that the environmental attitudes of the students

with more siblings were statistically significant influenced by surfing the internet (F(1,27) =

6.500, p <.05). There were no statistically significant influences of the other activities.

Table 11: Results of the RM ANOVA comparing modes of experience and

number of siblings

1 to 2 More than 3 RM ANOVA


1 Camping 18 1.777 .808 10 1.700 .948 .053 .820

2 In nature with family 18 1.611 .849 10 1.900 .875 .727 .402

3 Television 18 1.833 .707 10 1.900 .567 .065 .801

4 Magazines 18 1.500 .785 10 1.800 .918 .831 .370

5 Internet 18 1.333 .485 10 1.800 .421 6.500 .017

6 Social activities 18 1.722 .669 10 1.900 .567 .503 .485

Figure 12: Mean comparison between modes of experience and number of siblings

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Camping Nat ure Tv Magazines Int ernet Social

Sub-experiences

Mea

n Boy

Gir l

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Camping Nature Tv Magazines Internet Social

Sub-experiences

Mea

n 1 or 2More than 2


54

Modes of experience and worldviews

Through RM ANOVA, it was found that the modes of experience did not have any

statistically significant influences on the biocentric and ecocentric groups’ environmental

attitudes (see Table 12).


worldviews

Biocentric Ecocentric RM ANOVA


1 Camping 12 1.500 .674 16 1.937 .928 1.902 .180

2 In nature with family 12 1.750 .866 16 1.687 .873 .035 .852

3 Television 12 1.750 .621 16 1.937 .680 .560 .461

4 Magazines 12 1.333 .651 16 1.812 .910 2.393 .134

5 Internet 12 1.416 .514 16 1.562 .512 .553 .464

6 Social activities 12 1.750 .621 16 1.812 .655 .065 .801

Figure 13: Mean comparison between modes of experience and worldviews

Modes of experience and preferred recreational activities

As shown in Table 13, it was found that modes of experience did not have any

statistically significant influence on the level of environmental attitudes among students who

preferred motorised, consumptive and appreciative recreational activities.


preferred recreational activities

Motorised Consumptive Appreciative RM ANOVA

n m sd n m sd n m sd f Sig.

1 Camping 10 1.800 1.032 4 1.750 .957 14 1.714 .726 .028 .973

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5


Sub-experiences

Mea

n BiocentricEcocentric


55

2 In nature with family 10 1.800 .788 4 1.000 .000 14 1.875 .662 1.733 .197

3 Television 10 2.000 .666 4 1.500 .577 14 1.857 .662 .833 .446

4 Magazines 10 1.900 .875 4 1.000 .000 14 1.5714 .851 1.799 .186

5 Internet 10 1.400 .516 4 1.250 .500 14 1.642 .497 1.249 .304

6 Social activities 10 1.800 .632 4 1.250 .500 14 1.928 .615 1.934 .166

Figure 14: Mean comparison between modes of experience and preferred

recreational activities

Summary of key findings

1. Overall results of the camp

• Before the camp, the students already held positive environmental attitudes.

• The camp resulted in a statistically significant improvement in the students’


• All of the MGOAI subscales improved after the camp. The highest improvements

were recorded in the pollution subscale, followed by environment, learning and social

subscales.

2. Gender differences

• Both genders improved in their environmental attitudes.

• The girls’ post-camp overall environmental attitude scores were higher than the boys.

• The girls recorded higher improvement than boys in the learning and environment

subscales. There were no significant differences between boys and girls in the other

subscales. However girls scored slightly higher than boys in all of those subscales.

3. Number of siblings

• The number of siblings did not influence the overall attitudinal improvement

• In the pre test, students with more siblings recorded statistically significant

improvement in the learning subscale. There were no significant differences in the

post-test score.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5


Sub-experiences

Mea

n MotorisedConsumptiveAppreciative


56

4. Worldviews

• Worldviews did not influence the overall attitudinal improvement.

5. Preferred recreational activities

• Preferred recreational activities did not influence the overall attitudinal improvement.

• In the pre test, students who preferred appreciative recreational activities recorded

statistically significant improvement in the environment subscale, but this result

diminished in the post-test.

6. Previous experiences

• Previous experiences did not influence the overall attitudinal improvement.

• In pre and post-tests, students with more experiences recorded significant

improvement only in the social subscale.

7. Modes of experience and gender

• Girls’ environmental attitudes were influenced by surfing the internet, participating in

environmental activities and reading environmental magazines. Boys were not.

• There were no differences between boys and girls in the other modes of experience

activities (camping, time spent in the natural environment, watching environmental

television).

8. Modes of experience and number of siblings

• The attitudes of students with more siblings were influenced by surfing the internet.

9. Modes of experience and worldviews

• Modes of experiences did not influence the attitudinal improvement of the students

with biocentric and ecocentric worldviews.

10. Modes of experience and preferred recreational activities

• Modes of experience did not influence the attitudinal improvement of the students

who preferred appreciative, consumptive or motorised recreational activities.


57

CHAPTER 5

QUALITATIVE RESULTS

The purpose of the qualitative inquiry was to provide support for Research Question 1

and 2, which examined the effects of camp and the socio-demographic variables on

environmental attitudinal change. It was also utilised to answer Research Question 3, which

examined the camp elements that might be influential. It was also envisaged that insight

would emerge on the process of attitudinal change.

Qualitative data was collected from interviews and participant observation. Data was

analysed using a Constant Comparative Method where patterns, themes and categories

were developed and then grouped based on their similarities. The analysed data is

presented in three sections. The first section outlines the participants’ background; the

second section describes the camp and specifically focuses on the research questions: (1)

the effects of camp on the improvement of environmental attitudes; (2) the influence of

previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities on environmental

attitude change; (3) the elements of the camp that may influence the environmental


58

attitudinal changes, and; (4) the process of attitudinal change. The final section provides a

summary of key findings.

The interview participants

For the purpose of confidentiality, pseudonyms are used in this chapter. The interview

data was gained from three students (David, Mike and Sara), both through individual

interviews and a focus group interview. Interviews were also conducted with a teacher (Mrs

Lina) and a parent (Mr Robin) to provide other perspectives on the camp experiences.

Students The students in this study had an average age of 12 years and were in a Year Eight

class at an intermediate school. The interviews were conducted with David, Mike and Sara

during school time, three days after the camp.

David is a physically active student and has been involved in many outdoor activities

with his parents since his early childhood. He shared that he has experienced at least four

camping experiences in the last six months. He has a brother, and both of his parents are

employed. During the camp he was observed to have good outdoor skills and a strong

awareness of the natural environment. He appeared to really enjoy the camp experiences

and wished to participate more.

Sara is a school prefect and has been involved actively in many school social

activities (clubs and associations). This camp was her third camping experience and she

seemed to really enjoy it. She has a brother, a sister, and both of her parents are employed.

In the camp, Lisa liked to explore the natural surroundings with her friends.

Mike is a physically active student and has been involved in several outdoor activities

such as camping and tramping. He gained most of his outdoor experiences from school

outdoor education activities. He has a sister, and both of his parents are employed. In the

camp, Mike seemed really enjoy tramping, swimming, and also participated actively in all of

the activities. He also showed a strong concern for the environment during the camp.

Teacher and parent

Mrs Lina is the school’s Outdoor Education Head of Department. She is 48 years old

and has been teaching in the school since the 1970’s. She has 15 years experience in

leading the school’s outdoor education camp and held several professional outdoor


59

qualifications (e.g. Bush One5, Outdoor First Aid). Through her outdoor experiences she

holds positive beliefs about the influence of outdoor experiences on environmental attitudes.

Mr Robin is a 42-year-old local bank manager. He is David’s father and was involved

in the camp as a parent helper. He has had many outdoor educational and recreational

experiences since his early childhood. Throughout our discussions and my personal

observation, Mr Robin seemed to have strong concerns about global environmental issues.

General knowledge on environmental issues

Through the interviews, David, Mike and Sara demonstrated strong concerns for the

environment. They were all aware of current environmental issues and problems and

believed that human activity had heavily impacted on the natural environment. In addition

they agreed that pollution was among the most serious of environmental problems. Pollution from other countries, global warming, chopping down the rainforest in Brazil and stuff…yeah…and like not using disposable and stuff…it is not good for the environment because [it] do not break down…it takes thousands of years…(Mike)

The students perceived that they gained most of their pre camp environmental

information and knowledge in school. Prior to the camp, the teacher conducted

environmental topics in the classroom, which covered some current environmental issues

such as pollution, global warming and deforestation. In their camp journals, there were notes

about plants, the geographical layers of the bush, the environmental care code, and minimal

impact camping techniques. There was also a video session focusing on tramping and river

crossing techniques. In addition, there was a pre-camp practical session focusing on outdoor

skills such as river crossing and outdoor cooking.

All of the interviewed students highlighted the importance of an educational approach

in minimising current environmental issues. Education,…rubbish facilities. Yeah! I think that education is really important in promoting environmental awareness. So people can realise about it and have fun in nature. (Sara)

This view was strongly supported by Mr Robins, David’s father who was also involved

as a parent helper on the camp. He believed that education is the best medium for

minimising environmental issues. It [education] has to help definitely. It is the only vehicle that you [have] got to install some awareness in the kids. They are not going to have it while watching television. It has to be done at school.

5 The New Zealand Outdoor Instructor Association (NZOIA) award Bush One is an acknowledgement that the holder possesses the prerequisite capabilities and abilities in that given area.


60

Mike believed that there was a need for attitudinal changes in societies if environmental

problems were to be minimised. He believed that these changes are best developed through

an educational approach. [Through an educational approach] you can tell people at [a] younger age [about] what [is] happening so that when they get older they know what is happening around the world…like one day they might actually do something to help stop it [the environmental problems].

As well as an educational approach, David believed that there was also a need for rule

enforcement because it has been proven effective in minimising environmental problems. Well…the rules stopped it and education prevents it from happening. So a bit of both probably….Because if you look when like the Moriori were here, the whole New of Zealand was bush [but] now [it is decreasing]. There is [only] a wee bit down our coast [and] a wee bit down the West Coast. The students also believed that environmental knowledge and environmental attitudes

were best learned outdoors as the outdoors provides real environmental experiences and

hands on activities. I think we should learn it [about the environment] where the nature is. And then we can learn about it [the environment] and see what nature is into that…yeah…like outside where it is and stuff…[because in class] some people don’t take care of it and they just write it down because [they are] in hurry…but outside [in the outdoors] they can see what it [the environment] is like. (Sara) From many comments from the students, the teacher and the parent, it appears that

outdoor education is a good approach for the improvement of environmental attitudes as it

provides knowledge and feelings of concern towards the environment. I also believe that outdoor camp is the best way to develop all of these senses [environmental attitudes]. (Mrs Lina) Yeah, my father took us camping while we were quite young. I think from year to year, those experiences have made me more concerned about nature. And I also did the same things [family camping] to my kids too. (Mr Robin)

Throughout the interviews, the students believed that school was an effective approach

to minimise environmental problems. They also believed that education has more long-

lasting effects than rules and restrictions. They suggested that environmental knowledge and

attitudes are best learned in the outdoors as it provides direct experiences. These beliefs

were strongly supported by a teacher and a parent.


61

The Camp

The main purpose of this camp was to develop social and outdoor safety skills among

the students. There were no specific environmental focus activities in this camp except my

environmental games. The students were exposed to a variety of activities and challenges

such as night tramping, swimming, bushwalking and a police dog demonstration. In

developing self-responsibility, the students cooked their own meals and slept in tents. The

details of the programmes are listed in Appendix E.

This camp was administered by three teachers and four parents who were present

throughout. They were the school’s outdoor education head of department, class teacher, a

volunteer teacher and parent volunteers. During the camp, the students generally looked

excited and enjoyed their experiences. During activity breaks or teatime they spent their time

chatting, playing games or helping each other. Throughout our discussions, the students

described their enjoyment of camping experiences. They believed that those experiences

had developed positive relationships with friends and feelings of concern towards the natural

environment.

Mike believed that the camp experiences were more fun than learning in the school

because they gave him more freedom and authority in doing things that he liked… Well I thought it was fun because we could spend time away from school and do stuff in the outdoors. I actually like doing [the] loop track and doing whatever we want to do. While cleaning their tent, one of the students told me that the camp had developed

more positive social relationships between boys and girls than in the classroom. …seems like in this camp, the girls behave much better to boys than in class.

Research Question 1

Does a residential outdoor education camp cause a change in students’ environmental

attitudes?

Overall, the interviewed students believed that the camp had positively influenced

their environmental attitudes. Throughout the interviews, it appears that the camp

experiences had brought them closer to the natural environment. Yes I do I think. I think I have [improved my environmental attitudes] because before I came um… I ‘sorta’ had a bit of an idea of what it is going to be like, but not as much as after. And after your games that you have played with us…it could [be] even bigger… and higher environmental awareness. (Mike) Well…I am not saying that l was less [environmentally aware] before but I was not as conscious about like picking up other people’s litter and stuff. But on the tramp I


62

have picked up rubbish…and yeah I am definitely more aware now…of how we should treat it [the environment]…yeah after the camp. (David)

Mrs Lina supported her students’ opinions. She inferred that the camp might have

resulted in positive improvement in her students’ environmental attitudes especially in caring

for the natural environment. I believe that there will be some positive outcomes after this camp especially in caring for the natural environment. In the individual interview, Sara told me that the camp experiences (especially the

tramping) gave her a chance to walk, touch and smell plants and trees that surrounded the

camping area. These opportunities had developed her sense of concern for the natural

environment. Yeah…it make me feel closer to the environment and umm…because you can just feel like going around and feel what trees are and it is quite nice feeling and smelling the trees that were around you and…err…yeah you do not think about going around and smelling the trees before…yeah it makes me feel closer to the environment. (Sara)

David, Mike and Sara believed that most students had improved their environmental

attitudes after the camp. However, they also believed that some of them would not change

as they took the camp experiences for granted. Umm…probably about eight [out of ten students] will have a positive attitude towards it [the environment]. (Sara) Umm…I have not talked to them [about the environmental attitudinal improvement] but probably seven or eight [out of ten students may have had improved attitudes], which is pretty good. Because there will always be the one than won’t. (David) Umm…yeah I think that the people [students] are probably more aware [about the environment now]… and probably some teachers as well. (David)

Research question 2

How are changes in environmental attitude influenced by previous experiences in outdoor

and environmental activities?

In Research Question 2, I focused on the influences of previous experiences on the

student’s environmental attitudes improvement. Most of the interviewed students suggested

that media (television, books) and in-class activities could be directly influential.


63

Yeah I suppose if you watch documentaries, and then read book on the nature…it could as well improve your environmental attitudes. (Mike) Yeah…probably because I have read a couple of nature books, and like before [the] camp Mr. Smith make sure that we did not litter or anything. He let us watch videos and [told us] what to do in camp and stuff…like how to treat it [the environment]. (David)

In addition, Sara believed that outdoor activities such as tramping and camping are

more effective than reading books or watching television. She highlighted that these activities

provided the ‘doers’ with the actual experiences and awareness of the issues that are

currently threatening the environment. These actual experiences would make them more

concerned towards the natural environment. Well…probably a walk in the bush…yeah…and doing those [outdoor] activities…umm…like the website and books and watching television and stuff is really good but they [are] not actually the real thing. Like if you went down in the bush and just had a look, it’s like what and where the stuff has been destroyed to create something…. (Sara)

Mr Robin supported Sara’s ideas. In addition he highlighted the influence of parents

and education: It depends on the kids. It comes down to the parents to be. Environmental awareness is not the teacher’s responsibilities only. But we must also remember that some of the kids still do not have the chance to go to camp or walk in the bush, then they have to get it from somewhere.

These statements appear to support the influence of previous experiences and socio-

demographics on the development of environmental attitudes. Most of the interview

participants believed that media (e.g. internet, books, television), social and recreational

activities, and parents and education were influential.

Research question 3

What elements of a residential outdoor education camp do the students perceive as


Enhancements in their environmental attitudes were perceived by David, Mike, and

Sara, as particularly influenced by the environmental games, tramping activities and personal

experiences in the outdoors. Mr Robin also believed that minimal impact techniques had a

significant influence. Each of these activities could be categorised as direct and indirect

environmental elements.


64

For this study a direct environmental element is an activity that had a specific

environmental focus (environmental games) while an indirect environmental element is an

activity that did not have a specific focus on the development of environmental knowledge

and attitudes (e.g. tramping, minimal impact camping).

Direct environmental activity

The interviewed students agreed that environmental games had influenced the

improvement of their environmental attitudes. Probably your games that you have played with us…the camera one where we have to go up to the flowers, the one where we have to go up [to] the tree and smell it and feel the bark and making the national park, having to write a wee signs…(David) Umm...activities that you have done…going around and kind of…like being blindfolded, feeling [the] tree and smelling it and then taking the blindfold off and seeing what tree it was. You can kind of recognise some trees by their shapes when you feel it and you can smell the trees there with different sense…yeah. (Sara)

In support Mrs Lina believed that tree-hugging activities in the environmental games

had brought the students closer to nature and improved their attitudes. I think what you did probably had them closer to it [the environment] than anything else [other activities]. The tree hugging is really great isn’t it?

Similarly the students ranked tree hugging and mini national park (see Appendix G) as

the main activities that improved their environmental attitudes. The tree hugging activity is

focused on developing sensory awareness and feelings of concern towards the environment.

In that activity a partner guided a blindfolded student to touch and / or smell a tree. Then the

blindfolded was removed and the student had to find the tree again.

Through my reflective journal I also noticed that the tree hugging activity had developed

the students’ sense of awareness towards the natural environment. This is the best activity in this session [environmental games] where all of the kids seem really interested and enjoyed it. By the end of this activity the kids had enhanced all of their sensory awareness in order to recognise their ‘tree’.

The tree hugging activity may also have developed feelings of connection to the natural

environment among the students, perhaps influencing the development of concern towards

the environment and later the improvement of their environmental attitudes.

Whilst tree hugging, I heard one of the students tell his friend that he now realised that

the visual senses are not the only techniques in identifying a tree. I just realised that there were a lot of ways to identify a tree.


65

The activity had also attracted the classroom teacher to experience the activity himself.

He then told me that the activity not only developed the students’ sensory awareness to the

environment but also trust in their partner.

The mini national park is focused on developing nature awareness among the students.

In a group they were asked to create a mini national park using natural materials. Then they

had to highlight the natural uniqueness of their park. Through this activity it was observed

that the students had creatively worked to conserve their ‘park’, identified their natural

attraction and promoted the attraction to the ‘tourists’. I suggested that such actions might

influence the students’ environmental knowledge and awareness. This idea was supported

by the students and in the group interview they highlighted the mini national park activity as

being influential.

From these statements, environmental games appear to influence the improvement

of the students’ environmental attitudes. This finding was consistent with that of Mackay

(1981) who highlighted the importance of a direct environmental focus in outdoor education

camp in order to improve the students’ environmental attitudes.

Indirect environmental activity

An indirect environmental element is a camp activity that does not have any specific

environmental focus on it (Mackay, 1981), though it has influenced the improvement of the

students’ environmental attitudes. The interview participants’ perceived that tramping

activities, minimal impact camping techniques, and environmental thinking had also

influenced the improvement of their environmental attitudes.

Tramping activities

It was suggested that tramping activities would provide an opportunity for the students

to explore and experience the natural environment. Walking along the track, touching the

plants and watching the fantail birds on the top of the trees might have developed a sense of

awareness.

David, Mike and Sara, supported by Mrs Lina, believed that tramping activities had

influenced the development of their environmental attitudes. They believed that tramping

experiences had provided them with environmental knowledge and feelings of concern

towards the natural environment.

Sara believed that after the tramping activity she had been more aware of the natural

environment. I feel like I should look for the environment more [after the tramp]…and ah,…kind of when you [are] going on tramp, you were not allowed to talk loud because it would


66

scare all of the birds away…[you had to] just to look them quietly and keep walking…yeah.

In addition, David highlighted that tramping had developed his thinking about the

environment. The things that I have figured out myself like on the tramp when I was just looking down from the top…it looks really nice and to think like the walking track is being made. They must have like pulled down the trees all sorts like to do that. And just look down there…at the environment where no one touches them. Where it is just like in its own thing. That was really nice…yeah.

Mrs Lina suggested that the tramping activities might develop feelings of appreciation

towards the natural environment among her students. They also have an appreciation of streams in the tramp.

Minimal impact camping activities

Mr Robin believed that minimal impact camping techniques such as selecting

campsites, managing the camp cleanliness and hygiene, and minimal impact camping (MIC)

techniques had strong influences on the development of environmental attitudes. To him all

of these practices were indirect approaches in educating the students to respect and take

care of the natural environment. If I take my kids camping, I will educate them in everything, from where you [should] camp, is it safe, the water cleanliness, litter, the toilet condition and how deep it should be and you should leave the place [as] how you find it. Use only fallen wood, broken branches, trees etc. And if you start and add it in an early phase of the kids, then they are going to remember things like that in the future.

I am supportive of Mr Robin’s idea about the influences of MIC techniques on attitudinal

improvement. Through observations, I believe that the students have indirectly learned about

their impact on the natural environment during the camp. While managing the campsite

layout, they had to think about their impact on the environment. This process of thinking

could provide them with environmental knowledge and a sense of awareness towards the

natural environment, which could influence their environmental attitudes.

During the camp inspection, one of the groups had promoted a bird’s nest as their tent

attraction. One of the parents introduced a walnut tree to the students and let some of them

taste the nuts. All of these actions contribute to the sense of relationship and an awareness

of natural surroundings among the students. Furthermore students also indirectly learn to

care for the wildlife (birds) and about the value of natural materials (e.g. walnut).


67

Deep environmental thinking

There was evidence of deeper environmental thinking among the interviewed students.

Sara believed that spending time in the outdoors gave her a chance to make a connection

with her natural surroundings and to realise the contrast with her daily environment.

Comparing these two different environments may have influenced the improvement of her

attitudes. Environment in camp is much nicer. There are no cars and it is natural. I love being there. It is better when there is no rubbish, I also think [that] I really enjoyed the nature in camp [rather] than [any] other place [e.g. city, school or home]. David had thought deeply about human-nature relationships during that camp. Using a

metaphor, he compared his first night’s experience with his home environment.

Umm…like sleeping in the tent I heard the rain falling on the roof and I heard noises outside like cows [and] I think there was a dog.. It is just better than sleeping at your bed at home when you hear nothing except maybe parents talking and cars going past. And yeah…like sleeping in the tent [that] night…it was raining and it was just pouring down and there was people moving and there was trees rustling in the wind and the creek running, and the animals’ sound is beautiful. Mike told me that spending time in the outdoors had improved his environmental

attitudes. He suggested that those experiences made him think about the natural

environment and influenced him to find solutions to minimised the environmental issues.

Just being there…in the outdoors, being there will make you think about it. Thinking of how you can improve the environment.

David believed that other than environmental games, his personal deep

environmental thinking had influenced the improvement of his environmental attitudes. To

him the tramping experiences made him think about human impacts on the environment.

The things that I have figured out myself like on the tramp when I was just looking down from the top…it looks really nice and to think like the walking track is being made. They must something like pulled down the trees all sorts like to do that.

Sara believed that she will practice her modified environmental attitudes in her daily

life. In addition she wished her daily environment to be as pristine as the bush. Umm…yeah I am going to do it [practice the improved attitudes into daily settings] because in the bush it looks really nice and calm with no rubbish. I hope that our world will [be] like that.


68

The importance of a direct environmental focus in camp

As both direct and indirect environmental focus activities influenced the students’

environmental attitudes, I examined the participants’ beliefs about the importance of each

element. Overall, David, Mike and Sara believed that a direct environmental focus in outdoor

education or camping activities was important in improving their environmental attitudes as it

provided them with direct environmental knowledge and experiences. Yes [direct environmental focus is important]… well because we were not like informed before [as] no one really talked to us about doing it [protecting the environment]. But now we know about it [and] we are more aware about the environment. (David) Yes I think it is really important to learn about nature and stuff [in camp] so people can realise about it and not just go and wreck it…yeah. (Sara) Probably your activity…they were actually, because the bivouac [activity] was not like seeded out to [develop] environmental awareness or it was not as much. But we know more from your one because they were set out to be like activities to teach us to take care of it [the environment]. (David)

They also believed that environmental teaching strategies, and reinforcement were

really important in camp because they had a powerful influence on the improvement of

environmental attitudes. In a group discussion, Mike raised the importance of these elements …you need to be taught about it [environmental topic in outdoor education programs] as well. If not it is hard for you to think about it [the environment]. Sara also believed that a direct environmental input should be given in the beginning

and during resting periods of the tramping activities. This input would bring the students’

attention and awareness to the environment during that activity. Umm…before you start walking [or] like where we have our lunch [during the tramp] you can just talk about what is around us so we [may] think about it [the environment]. But [I think that] you have to realise it yourself as well. The importance of a direct environmental focus and teaching strategy was strongly

supported by Mr Robin. In discussing the lack of awareness of the students of their natural

surroundings, he believed that these students were young and needed guidance in order to

develop meaningful experiences. If you realise while they are building their tent, only a couple of kids were aware of their natural surroundings, for example a couple of wood pigeons on top of the tree. I was thinking how many of these kids realise the important value of those birds.


69

He later argued about the lack of environmental focus and teaching strategies in the

camp, which he described as more focused on activity accomplishment than the quality of

environmental experiences. Most of these kids rush when they go for a walk in the bush. They did not actually stop and look or smell the flowers or whatever. You know that tramping is a good example of what I think. It would be better if you had four hours of tramping and stopping and talking about the natural environment than two hours of rushed walk. Because it was nice bush, maybe you can tell the kids about the historical things like the raceway, talk a little bit about birds in that area, insects or what ever. But again I do not know if they have it in school. But again I really believe that you are better off doing a four-hour walk than two hours walking and stop them to study or enjoy the natural environment.

My observations highlighted the lack of reinforcement of environmental aspects from

the teacher. In my reflective journal, for example, I wrote about the lack of explanation about

glow-worms in the night tramping activities. After an hour walk, we arrived at a glow-worm habitat. All of the kids seemed really excited to watch it. However, as there were no explanations about the glow-worms from the teacher, the kids’ interests decreased. Some of them just walked through it without showing any interest.

A little explanation about the glow-worm may have developed useful environmental

knowledge among the students. That knowledge may heighten their sense of awareness

towards other creatures and their importance in the life cycle.

The same situation also occurred in the tramping activity where there was a lack of

reinforcement about the history, and flora and fauna on the track. Initially this initiative had

been taken by some of the parents who were familiar with the natural surroundings and gave

brief explanations to some of the students and this was recorded through my reflective

journal. On the tramping track, one of the parents showed blueberry plants to kids and let them taste it. This is really good in promoting the sense of awareness among the kids on natural food resources.

In discussing this issue, Mrs Lina told me that the environment focus was not the main

focus of the camp as most of the environmental focus had been done in school. Environmental objectives mostly have been done in school where teachers have a talk about the environmental care codes.

She also believed an environmental focus did not necessarily need to be one of the

main focuses in camp as it could be implemented in other outdoor education activities or

other curriculum areas such as social studies and science.


70

I definitely think that it could improve. But we always look in two ways to improve it. We would bring it [environmental focus] in environmental studies activities in other curriculum areas not just outdoor education. For example in Year Eight, the children will do their bush study and they go out to the bush area. I really think that those activities that you had are really good for that. So it would not be necessary to do it in camp but we will do it in another curriculum area.

Research question 4

If changes take place, when and how do they occur?

The students believed that the environmental games provided them with stimulus and

new knowledge concerning the natural environment. This then guided them to explore

natural areas, make connections with the natural environment, and may have influenced the

improvement in their environmental knowledge. Yeah…it makes me feel closer to the environment and umm…because you can just feel like go around and feel what trees are and it is quite nice feeling and smelling the trees that were around you and…err…yeah you do not think about going around and smelling the trees before…yeah it makes me feel closer to the environment. (Sara)

Mike described that after a few learning activities in ROE camps, he became more

concerned towards the environment. Well…the lessons that you have taught [improved my environmental attitudes]. Like we have done it as a lesson…as you are teaching it to us. Learning while you are in nature is much nicer than learning in a classroom. Because you can actually see what are you doing and you can do what you have learned…as well…and more fun too. Most camps do help and improve your environmental attitudes because you are doing what you are learning so you like actually seeing what can happen and what cannot as well… My observations suggested that the environmental games might have also influenced

the improvement in the students’ environmental knowledge. Through group discussion, they

process and try to make meaning of the new knowledge that they have gained during that

activity. In my reflective journal I wrote This session [mini national park] was a successful session in developing kids creativity and thoughts about the natural environment. Each group had creatively highlighted their park uniqueness such as having the tallest tree, the unique monkey species and the biggest white water river in the world.

Reflective sessions at the end of the activity appeared to reinforce their new knowledge

or experiences. Through the students’ reflective and evaluative activities, the new knowledge


71

may have influenced their environmental attitudes improvement. In my reflective journal I

noted the improvement of environmental knowledge or experiences among the students. In the debriefing session, the kids have described their unique techniques such as touching the bark, counting the trunks and smelling the leaves in identifying their trees. I am sure that all of these actions and reflections have developed their knowledge, awareness and concern towards the natural environment.

The students perceived that they would transfer their improved environmental

attitudes into daily behaviour. These were evidenced through Mike’s interview statements. Yes definitely [I will practice my environmental attitudes into daily living]. I will help pick up litter and make sure people protect the environment. (Mike)

From the interviews the students perceived that the environmental games had mostly

influenced the development of new knowledge. The students then may evaluate and

meditate and improved their new environmental knowledge through group discussions,

reflective sessions, deep environmental thinking, and personal solitude. The new knowledge

may have influenced the improvement of their environmental attitudes and intention to

protect the environment.

Summary of key findings

1. The influence of camp on environmental attitudes improvement

• It appears that the interviewed students enjoyed their camp experiences and believed

they improved their environmental attitudes.


72

• The students recognised that attitudinal change was necessary to minimise

environmental problems and also believed that this is best achieved through

education.

• Students believed that environmental attitudes are best developed in the outdoors

rather than the classroom because it provides them with direct experiences and

‘hands on’ activities.

2. The influence of socio-demographic factors and previous experiences upon the development of environmental attitudes

• The interviewed students identified outdoor recreational experiences (e.g. camping

and tramping), reading environmental books, surfing the internet and watching

environmental television as influencing their attitudes.

• The parent perceived that family and educational influences affect attitudes.

3. Camp elements that influenced the improvement of environmental attitudes

• The students identified environmental games as the main influential elements as they

guided them with direct knowledge and experiences for the natural environment.

• They also identified tramping, spending time in the outdoors and general camping

activities as influential. They perceived these activities as providing chances for

human-nature interaction.

• The students and a parent had strong views on the importance of a specific

environmental focus in outdoor education programs to improve environmental

attitudes. The teacher also believed that it could be implemented in other curriculum

areas.

4. The process of attitudinal change

• The process partially supports Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the

Wilderness. Environmental games were identified as the environmental stimulus that

influenced the knowledge and beliefs component of the theory. New knowledge and

experiences were potentially accepted through evaluative and meditative processes,

and adapted in modified attitudes and intention to protect the environment.

CHAPTER 6

DISCUSSION


73

This study used a mixed methods approach utilising quantitative and qualitative inquiry

to investigate the effects of a residential outdoor education (ROE) camp on the development

of environmental attitudes. In discussing the study findings both quantitative and qualitative

results are corroborated to examine each research question. The following chapter is divided

into four sections, with each discussing a separate research question.

Research Question 1

Does a residential outdoor education camp cause a change in students’ environmental

attitudes?

Both quantitative and qualitative inquiries recorded positive outcomes. From the

quantitative results, the pre test mean score was 154 and this increased by 10 points in the

post-test (x = 164). This increment indicates statistically significant improvement in the

students’ environmental attitudes (p = .001). As a result, the first hypothesis which stated

there will be statistically significance changes in students’ environmental attitudes after

participating in a ROE camp as measured by the Millward Ginter Outdoor Attitudes Inventory

(MGOAI), is accepted.

In comparing the overall pre and post-test results with previous studies in ROE

camps that used the MGOAI instrument, the researcher found similarities. Millward (1974)

and Mittelstaedt et al's. (1999) studies also found statistically significant improvement on the

students’ environmental attitudes.

The present study MGOAI score improvement (10 points) was greater than

Mittelstaedt et al.(1999) (5 point increases). However, it is important to note that the MGOAI

pre and post-test mean scores in their study (pre test = 168, post-test = 173) were higher

than the present study. A possible reason for this difference is that people with lower

environmental attitude levels may benefit more from the ROE camp. Shepard and Speelman

(1986) also found students with lower environmental attitudes recorded the highest

improvement from a ROE camp.

Another possible explanation for MGOAI score differences between the present study

and Mittelstaedt et al. (1999) is that of ‘ceiling effects’. ‘Ceiling effects’ is a Likert’s scale

limitation, and it occurs when respondents’ score highly in both pre and post-tests and

therefore minimal changes on the score are expected (see Eagles & Demare, 1999). In

Mittelstaedt’s et al’s.(1999) study, the students scored higher in the pre test (168) thus

exposing the results to ‘ceiling effects’. On the other hand the present study pre test mean

scores are 14 points lower than Mittelstaedt’s et al study, thus the chances for environmental

attitude scores improvement are greater. Eagles and Demare (1999) and Lisowski and


74

Disinger (1991) found students with lower pre test scores showed the greatest environmental

attitude gains by the end of the camp.

In comparing the present research findings with Mackay6 (1981), it is found that New

Zealanders may have more positive environmental attitudes than 22 years ago. However it is

important to note that Mackay’s study involved a bigger population (n = 221), and a wider

range of age groups (10 to 16 years). Possible explanations for this improvement are: (1) the

introduction of Education Outside the Classroom (EOTC) curriculum; (2) the introduction of

the New Zealand 2010 Environmental Strategy; (3) the refinement of environmental and

outdoor education curriculum, and; (4) the influences of media.

The introduction of EOTC in 1986 may have influenced the improvement of

environmental attitudes. Based on the concept of education in the outdoors, EOTC has

potentially provided many New Zealand children with hands-on human-nature experiences in

the outdoors (Abbott, 1990).

The establishment of the New Zealand 2010 Environmental Strategy may have also

influenced the improvement of environmental attitudes. This strategy is an overall

governmental environmental policy and was introduced in 1995. The main goal was to

“…encourage environmentally responsible behaviour and informed participation in decision

making by promoting environmental education throughout the community” (Ministry for The

Environment, 1994, p.3). This strategy recognised the importance of environmental

education in all levels of education, business, vocation and community. The implementation

of this strategy may have influenced the environmental education process in New Zealand,

thus resulting in more positive environmental attitudes than 22 years ago.

Several refinements in the environmental education and outdoor education curriculum

may have strengthened their place in the New Zealand’s formal curriculum (Dowling, 1978;

Law & Baker, 1995). This contrasts with Mackay’s (1981) study period when environmental

education was still in the early stages of implementation, while outdoor education had not yet

been formalised. It was also suggested that in-class environmental learning activities

especially before the camp may have influenced the students positive environmental

attitudes. The pre-test scores indicated that the students already had positive environmental

attitudes with a raw score of 153.6 (see MGOAI rank order table in the Methodology

Chapter). Interview and observation data suggested that these positive environmental

attitudes were partially developed through in-class activities which were mostly learned

before the camp. In their camp journal there were notes about the geographical layers of the

bush, major environmental issues and earth stewardship practices. Prior to the camp a video

6 Mackay (1981) conducted a study to examine the effects of ROE camps on students’ environmental attitudes and self-concept. The study was conducted among 281 Canterbury’s Standard Four, Form Four and Form Six students. The environmental attitudes development was measured by the MGOAI, the same instrument that was used in this study. She found insignificant findings in both elements.


75

session covering minimal impact camping and environmental care code topics was

conducted in-class. The researcher suggested that these in-class environmental learning

activities might have influenced the development of positive environmental attitudes even

before the camp started. Mackay (1981), Mittelstaedt et al. (1999) and Dettmann-Easler and

Pease (1999) all suggested the importance of in-class environmental learning in conjunction

with ROE activities.

Exposure to media may be another possible reason differentiating the recent study

findings with Mackay (1981). Data from the socio-demographic questionnaire showed that

girls gained most of their environmental knowledge and attitudes from media such as the

internet, environmental magazines, and environmental television. During Mackay’s (1981)

study period these media forms had yet to seriously evolve, thus likely influenced the lack of

environmental knowledge among her study’s participants.

From the present study results, the Repeated Measures Analysis of Variances (RM

ANOVA) analysis indicated all of the MGOAI subscales (environment, pollution, social, and

learning) recorded statistically significant increases. The highest improvement is recorded in

the pollution subscale, followed by environment, learning, and social subscales.

Similarly, Mittelstaedt et al.(1999) found statistically significant improvements in all of

the subscales. The highest score was also recorded in the pollution subscale. However, the

rank order of the other subscales was different to the present study where it was followed by

social, learning and environment subscales. Socio-cultural differences, and type of

programme offered may be influential as their study was conducted in the United States. In

contrast with the present study, Millward (1973) only found statistically significant

improvement in environment and social subscales.

The MGOAI subscales rank order in the present study is partially similar to Mackay

(1981). Although Mackay’s overall study findings resulted in statistically insignificant

improvement on the students’ environmental attitudes, the rank order of the MGOAI

subscales scores in one of the Year Four camps is similar. The students scored higher in

environment, followed by pollution, learning and social subscales. But these findings have to

be treated with caution, as Mackay’s study involved a bigger sample population (221

students) and different age groups (10 to 16 years old).

From the qualitative results, the interviewed participants perceived that the camp had

resulted in positive environmental attitudinal improvement for the majority of the students.

Observation and interviews would suggest that this was driven by: (1) direct environmental

experiences; and (2) the uniqueness of the ROE camp learning process. For instance, Sara

described the uniqueness of the learning process in the camp which provided her with direct

experiences to walk, touch and smell the plants. These opportunities had developed her

feelings of concern and connectedness with the natural environment. Sara’s statement could

be linked with Haluza-Delay's (2001) study. He found that affective learning in the outdoors


76

through walking, touching and sensing the natural environment had improved the students’

environmental concern.

David believed that learning in the outdoors was more effective in improving

environmental attitudes than in-class as it provided direct and enjoyable human-nature

experiences. Corresponding with David’s statement, Chenery (1994) highlighted the learning

process in the ROE camp as unique as it involves greater flexibility in the types of

programmes offered and includes fun learning experiences. These situations develop a

sense of freedom among the students as they have more time to listen, relax and reflect on

the natural environment. The sense of freedom and fun learning activities which were

observed in this camp especially during tramping, bivouac building and environmental games

may have developed the students’ appreciation of environmental beauty and influenced the

improvement of their attitudes towards the environment.

Research Question 2

If so, how are changes in environmental attitudes influenced by the socio-demographic

variables of: (1) gender, (2) number of siblings, (3) environmental worldviews, (4)

preferred recreational activities, and (5) previous experiences in outdoor and

environmental education activities.

As noted previously, improvement of environmental attitudes is influenced by socio-

demographic variables such as gender, siblings and home environment, environmental

worldviews, previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities, and

preferred recreational activities (Dunlap & Heffernan, 1975; Eagles & Demare, 1999; Hanna,

1995; Tikka et al., 2000). It was the purpose of the second research question to determine

the influences of these variables on the improvement of environmental attitudes in this camp.

Gender

A quantitative inquiry was used to examine the influences of gender on the

improvement of environmental attitudes. Results from a paired sample t-test indicated that

both genders improved their environmental attitudes (boys p = .007; girls p = .001). However

results from further analysis using RM ANOVA indicated that there were statistically

significant differences on the level of environmental attitudes between genders, where girls

scored higher than boys. Based on this finding, the present study hypothesis 2 (a) which

stated there will be statistically significant differences between girls and boys environmental

attitudes level after participating in a ROE camp as measured by the MGOAI is accepted.

In comparing the result of gender differences in the present study with Millward

(1973) and Mackay (1981), no support was found as both studies recorded insignificant


77

differences. However there were similarities between the present study findings and those of

Mittelstaedt et al.(1999) who found, via independent t-test analysis, statistically significant

environmental attitudes differences between genders (boys p = .01; girls p = .005). Gender

environmental attitude differences in their study were greater than the present study. Socio-

cultural differences, and the type of programme offered may be influential on these

differences as their study was conducted in the United States.

Possible explanations for environmental attitude gender differences in the present

study are: (1) gender activity differences, and; (2) gender learning differences. From the

qualitative data, student experiences may appear gender differentiated. Sara (student)

described the camp experiences were peaceful and provided her with more sense of

connectedness with the natural environment. David and Mike (students) indicated the camp

as full of fun and a medium for doing physical things that were unavailable in school. The

girls were observed spending more time walking and chatting around the camp’s natural

surroundings while boys spent more time in playing games (e.g. football, rugby, cards).

These gender perceptions and free time activity differences may have influenced the

environmental attitude differences between them.

Klienfeld (1998) found learning interest differences between girls and boys. Girls

appear more interested in the abstract and symbolic, and pursue ‘feelings’ subjects such as

Language, Arts, Literature, and Biology. Boys appear more interested in innovative and

physical subjects such as Physical Education, Mathematics, and Technology. As learning

about the natural environment in this camp involved symbolic feeling and less physical

activity, girls may have benefited more than boys in improving their environmental attitudes.

However, it is also important to notice that investigations into gender differences in

environmental attitudes have been relatively few and inconclusive in their findings. Several

researchers found no differences at all (see Mackay, 1981; Millward, 1974). Changing

gender roles resulting from contemporary economic pressures may also influence

environmental attitudes in the future and this is an area of potential future research.

Number of siblings

A quantitative inquiry was utilised to examine the influences of siblings on the

improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes. The results showed that there were no

statistically significant differences between the students with less than two siblings and those

with more than two siblings. Therefore this study’s hypothesis 2 (b), which stated that there

will be significant environmental attitudes differences between students with less siblings and

students with more siblings, is rejected.

The present study findings contradict several previous studies (see Eagles &

Demare, 1999; Eagles & Muffitt, 1990). Chawla (1999) highlighted that during childhood


78

older siblings had a strong influences on the development of environmental attitudes. Musser

and Diamond (1999) study found that children observed older siblings; and gained

environmental attitudes, and behaviour from them. However, it is important to note that the

research methods and instruments for these studies varied, so caution must be taken when

interpreting these findings collectively.

Possible explanations for the insignificant findings of sibling influences on the

environmental attitudes improvement in the present study are: (1) relatively small family size

across all of the students, and; (2) age effects. All of the students have a small family size

(not more than three siblings). Thus the influence of other siblings on the development of

environmental attitudes is speculated to be weak or the same. As the students in the present

study were young adolescents (11 to 13 years), the researcher theorised that the influences

of siblings on the development of attitudes decreased whilst the ‘peer pressure’ (friends) and

education had increased. These influences may have also contributed to the insignificant

differences between the groups.

Environmental worldview

A quantitative inquiry was utilised to examine the influences of environmental

worldviews (biocentric, ecocentric) on the improvement of environmental attitudes. The

results showed that there were no statistically significant differences between these two

groups. As a result this study’s hypothesis 2 (c), which stated that there will be statistically

significance differences between the students environmental worldviews (biocentric,

ecocentric) and environmental attitudes changes after participating in a ROE camp, is

rejected.

The insignificant differences between the environmental worldview groups in the

present study contradict several researchers who theorised the ecocentric as having more

positive environmental attitudes than the biocentric (see Callicott, 2000; Hanna, 1995;

Knapp, 1999).

The following reasons are given to account for the absence of the statistically

significant environmental attitudes differences between the biocentric and ecocentric groups.

These are: (1) most of the students did not have strong environmental worldviews as they

were a younger age, and; (2) the influences of place of residence.

Because of their age (11 to 13 years), the students in the present study may not yet

hold strong environmental worldviews. Therefore they are more flexible in changing or

improving their attitudes towards the environment. Eagles and Demare (1999) suggested

that environmental attitudes and beliefs are still in a formation process between the ages of 8

to 14 years, thus they are easy to change.


79

All of the students in the present study lived in a small city of the South Island of New

Zealand which is less threatened by environmental issues than other major cities. This

situation may develop less extreme environmental worldviews between the biocentric and

ecocentric groups.

Preferred recreational activities

A quantitative inquiry was utilised to examine the influences of preferred recreational

activities (appreciative, consumptive, motorised) on the improvement of environmental

attitudes. The results showed that there were no statistically significant differences between

these groups. Based on these results the study’s hypothesis 2 (d) which stated that there will

be statistically significant differences between the students preferred recreational activities

on environmental attitudes changes after participating in a ROE camp is rejected.

The study’s insignificant environmental attitude differences between the preferred

recreational activities groups partially correspond with Theodori et al's. (1998) study. They

studied the effects of recreational activities on the development of environmental attitudes

among 1491 Pennsylvanian adults. In addressing the insignificant differences between their

groups, Theodori et al. (1998) suggested that many of the respondents were involved in

more than one type of recreational activity, thus this condition may have resulted in

redundancy on their responses in the questionnaire.

The findings in the present study and Theodori’s et al. contradicted other studies

which found the appreciative recreationists as holding more positive environmental attitudes

than others (Dunlap & Heffernan, 1975; Jackson, 1986; Liere & Noe, 1981; Tarrant & Green,

1999). However, it is important to note that all of these studies involved adults and used a

different instrument (New Environmental Paradigm) than MGOAI. Therefore caution should

be taken when interpreting these findings collectively.

Among proposed reasons for the insignificant differences between the appreciative,

consumptive, and motorised groups in the present study are: (1) the students were not

seriously involved in recreational activities, and; (2) the students may have participated in

more than one type of recreational activity. Participants in the present study were young

students with relatively few recreational experiences. Some were never involved in any freely

chosen recreational activities. Due to this condition the students may lack personal

experiences in their preferred recreational activities. Haluza-Delay (2001) highlighted that a

lack of personal experience in recreational activities may affect the development of positive

environmental attitudes. This situation is different to studies by Dunlap and Heffernan (1975),

Jackson (1986), Liere and Noe (1981) and Tarrant and Green (1999) as they involved adults

who had personal experience of that type of recreational activity.


80

The issue of recreational activity redundancy in Theodori et al’s. (1998) study may

also occur in the present study. In contrast, this study only allowed the students’ to choose

one type of preferred recreational activity. As a result they may have chosen the activity that

sounded interesting and challenging to them (e.g. mountain biking, four wheel motorbikes,

hunting, fishing) rather than activities they actually did, thus resulting in insignificant

differences among the groups.


Both quantitative and qualitative inquiry was used to examine the influences of

previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities on the improvement

of the students’ environmental attitudes. There appear some contrasts between the

quantitative and qualitative results in this area.

In the quantitative results, there were no statistically significant differences between

the group of students with more, moderate or less experiences in the outdoors and

environmental education activities. Thus the present study’s hypothesis 2 (e) which stated

there will be statistically significant influences of previous experiences in outdoor and

environmental education activities on students environmental attitude changes after

participating in a ROE camp is rejected.

The RM ANOVA analysis comparing the MGOAI pre and post tests scores between

the groups found only weak influences from previous experiences in outdoor and

environmental education activities. The students with more experiences recorded slightly

higher mean scores in both pre and post-tests (x = 3.839, x = 4.214) than the moderate (x =

3.634, x = 3.863), and less experienced (x = 3.617, x = 3.859) groups.

Possible reasons for the statistically insignificant results between the groups include

students being young and less experienced in outdoor and environmental education

activities. Therefore, these activities may only have weak influences on the development of

their environmental attitudes. Eagles and Demare (1999) and Eagles and Muffitt (1990)

theorised that students at these ages (11 to 13 years) gained more environmental

information from their formal educational sources (e.g. school, teacher) than their own

experiences. This situation, which had been discussed in the ‘number of siblings’ section,

may have also been influential.

In contrast with the insignificant quantitative results, the qualitative results indicated

the positive influences of previous experiences in outdoor, and environmental education

activities on the improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes. All of the interviewed

students believed that camping, tramping, watching environmental television, reading

environmental books and magazines, participating in environmental clubs and social

activities, and in-class environmental activities were influential.


81

The interview findings were supported by the researcher’s observation of David. As

one of the students who had many experiences7 in outdoor and environmental activities, he

exhibited positive environmental attitudes and behaviour in the camp (e.g. alert with camp

cleanliness, enjoyed the natural environment during tramping activities, and expressed his

concern towards human impact on the outdoors). During the interview he provided deeper

environmental insights than Lisa and Mike.

And yeah…like sleeping in the tent [at that] night…it was raining and it was just pouring down and there was people moving and there was trees rustling in the wind and the creek running, and the animals’ sound is beautiful.

Among reasons for the influences of previous experiences in outdoor and

environmental education activities on the improvement of environmental attitudes are: (1)

direct experiences in the natural environment, and; (2) longer educational experiences. The

interviewed students perceived previous experiences in outdoor and environmental

education activities as providing them with a direct environmental awareness. This camp

provided them with opportunities to develop their sense of appreciation towards the natural

environment and may have influenced the improvement of their environmental attitudes.

Most camps do help and improve your environmental attitudes because you are doing what you are learning so you like actually seeing what can happen and what cannot as well… (Mike) …learning while you are in nature is much nicer than learning in a classroom. Because you can actually see what are you doing and you can do what you have learned…as well…and more fun too. (Mike)

The researcher suggested the extended duration aspect of ROE camps, in relation to

the classroom, was a factor that influenced the improvement of the students’ environmental

attitudes. In a ROE camp setting the students have potentially more intensive learning

experiences per unit hour than in classroom, and this may expose them to more direct

experiences and learning opportunities (Dettmann-Easler & Pease, 1999). Camp likely

allowed more time for students to experience and make connections with the natural

environment than in-class activities. This idea is supported by Dettmann-Easler and Pease's

(1999) study that found ROE camps more effective in developing positive wildlife attitudes

than in-class programmes due to direct and longer educational experiences.

7 He claimed that he had participated in at least four outdoor camping experiences in the last six months.


82

Research Question 3

What elements of a residential outdoor education camp do the participants perceive as


Qualitative inquiry (interviews and observation) was utilised to study the elements of

the ROE camp that influenced the improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes.

Results showed that the interviewed participants (three students, a teacher, and a parent)

perceived environmental games as the main influential element. They also identified the

influence of tramping, spending time in the natural environment and general camping

activities. For the present study, these elements were divided into two main categories: (1)

activities with a direct environmental focus (environmental games), and; (2) activities with

indirect environmental focus (tramping, spending time in the outdoors, and general camping

activities.

Activities with a direct environmental focus

A direct environmental focus is an activity that has a specific focus on the development

of environmental knowledge and attitudes. Results showed that environmental games

influenced the improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes in this camp. This could

be evidenced through the students and the teacher statements:

Probably your games that you have played with us…the camera one where we have to go up to the flowers, the one where we have to go up [to] the tree and smell it and feel the bark and making the national park, having to write a wee signs…(David) I think what you did probably had them closer to it [the environment] than anything else [other activities]. The tree hugging is really great isn’t it?(Mrs Lina)

The influence of these activities on the improvement of environmental attitudes in the

present study supported several previous study findings (Dresner & Gill, 1994; Jaus, 1984;

Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). Based on the interviews and the researcher’s observations, it is

suggested that the environmental games influenced the improvement of the students’

environmental attitudes because they: (1) provided direct environmental experiences and

knowledge; (2) provided specific environmental learning and teaching strategies, and; (3)

provided a fun, learning situation.

David suggested that an environmental focus activity provided him with direct

environmental experiences and knowledge, and influenced his sense of connectedness

towards the natural environment.

Yes [direct environmental focus is important]… well because we were not like informed before [as] no one really talked to us about doing it [protecting the


83

environment]. But now we know about it [and] we are more aware about the environment. Mike believed that the environmental games provided him with environmental learning

opportunities which later developed his awareness for the natural environment. Yes I do I think. I think I have [improved my environmental attitudes] because before I came um… I sorta had a bit of an idea of what it is going to be like, but not as much as after. And after your games that you have played with us…it could [be] even bigger… and higher environmental awareness. (Mike)

The above interview statements correspond with Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement

In and For the Wilderness. She theorised that knowledge has a significance influence on

attitude formation. In addition, several studies have found people with sound environmental

knowledge as having more positive environmental attitudes (e.g. Jaus, 1984; Tarrant &

Cordell, 1997; Tikka et al., 2000).

Secondly, the students highlighted that the direct environmental focus activities

provided them with a specific environmental learning and teaching strategy. This is

supported by David’s statement

Probably your activity…they were actually, because the bivouac [activity] was not like seeded out to [develop] environmental awareness or it was not as much. But we know more from your one because they were set out to be like activities to teach us to take care of it [the environment].

Mike supported David’s idea; in addition he highlighted the importance of specific

environmental learning and teaching strategies in developing the students’ focus towards the

natural environment.

…you need to be taught about it [environmental topic in outdoor education camp] as well. If not it is hard for you to think about it [the environment].

The researcher also believed that specific environmental learning activities may have

enhanced the students’ environmental awareness and attitudes. The effects of these

influences were observed during the mini national park session. This session [mini national park] was a successful session in developing kids creativity and thoughts about the natural environment. Each group had creatively highlighted their park uniqueness such as having the tallest tree, the unique monkey species and the biggest white water river in the world.

Awareness about the uniqueness of the natural attraction in their ‘park’ might influence

their knowledge and enhance the improvement of their environmental attitudes as suggested

by Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness.


84

The importance of a direct environmental focus in providing specific environmental

learning and teaching strategies has been highlighted in several previous studies (e.g. Jaus,

1984; Mackay, 1981; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). Atkinson (1990) highlighted that specific

environmental teaching strategies provided the learners with real environmental learning

situations, which developed deep empathy and long-lasting environmental attitude

improvement. Mackay (1981) suggested that the lack of proper environmental teaching

strategies had influenced the insignificant environmental attitudes improvement in her study.

From the researcher’s observation, the environmental games provided the students

with fun and enjoyable learning situations. They were observed to enjoy and have fun during

the activities especially in the human camera and mini national park activities. These

observation data were supported by the students’ interviews. For instance, David highlighted

that the fun and enjoyment of the experiences had developed his environmental knowledge

which he can practice in the future.

The feelings of fun and enjoyment during the environmental games may provide low

intensity outdoor learning opportunities between the students and the natural environment,

thus influenced the improvement of the students’ environmental attitudes. The importance of

low intensity outdoor learning opportunities in enhancing environmental attitudes was

highlighted in Millward’s (1973) study. Perdue and Warder (1981) found high intensity

outdoor activities created ‘situational factors’ (e.g. fatigue, hunger, illness) which resulted in

the development of negative environmental attitudes.

This study provides support for the influences of a direct environmental focus on the

improvement of environmental attitudes. However, it is important to note that there are also

some studies with a direct environmental focus that found insignificant improvement in

environmental attitudes (see Eagles & Demare, 1999). Therefore, more research is needed

in this issue.

The importance of direct environmental focus in this camp

This section discusses the differences in ideas between the students, a parent and the

teacher on the importance of a direct environmental focus for this camp. From the qualitative

interviews the students and the parent believed that a specific environmental focus was

necessary in outdoor education activities to foster improvement of environmental attitudes.

However, the teacher believed that this is not necessary in her future camps as it could be

implemented into other outdoor education activities or formal curriculum subjects (e.g.

Sciences, Social Studies).

I definitely think that it could improve. But we always look in two ways to improve it. We would bring it [environmental focus] in environmental studies activities in other curriculum areas not just outdoor education. For example in year Eight, the children


85

will do their bush study and they go out to the bush area. I really think that those activities that you had are really good for that. So it would not be necessary to do it in camp but we will do it in another curriculum area. As discussed earlier there are imbalances in current outdoor education practices where

an environmental focus has typically been left behind. This situation has resulted in a lack of

awareness of the environment during outdoor education activities, as supported by several

New Zealand’s studies that found insignificant improvement on environmental attitudes (see

Mackay, 1981; Leberman, 1989).

Based on the current outdoor education situation in the New Zealand, the researcher

suggests that the contradiction of ideas between the students, the parent, and the teacher is

influenced by several factors: (1) the social construction of outdoor education in New

Zealand, and; (2) the introduction of environmental education into the formal education

curriculum.

Ideas between the students, the parent, and the teacher on the importance of a direct

environmental focus in ROE camp could be linked with current New Zealand’s outdoor

education practices, thus supporting Law's (1998) ‘imbalance’ argument. This situation may

also be influenced by the social construction8 of New Zealand outdoor education as a

medium of social and adventurous development (Zink, 2003). As a result the teacher may

have seen environmental games as not fitting in the camp programme because they lack

adventure and challenge, and therefore be more suitable to be implemented into other

outdoor education activities or formal curriculum areas (e.g. Sciences, Social Studies).

Lastly, the researcher believes that this issue might be a result of the promotion of

environmental education into the formal curriculum. Some outdoor educators may view this

introduction as a separation of the environmental focus from outdoor education practices. As

it could be implemented into another curriculum subjects, they may view that it is best for

outdoor education to concentrate on other foci (e.g. social and personal development, and

outdoor pursuits).

The contrast of opinion between the students, the parent and the teacher provides

future research opportunities. It is suggested that an area for future investigation is the

differences of perception between students and programme providers (teachers, institution)

on this issue.

8 Social construction is a concept where everyone views one particular thing (e.g. outdoor education) based on their own perspectives which is influenced by social practices, current societal contexts, cultures, history, politics, and beliefs (Brookes, 1994).


86

Activity with indirect environmental focus

From the qualitative inquiry students highlighted tramping, spending time in the

outdoors, and general camping activities as influencing the improvement of their

environmental attitudes. These activities are categorised as indirect environmental focus

activities, without any specific focus on the development of environmental knowledge and

attitudes but perceived by the students as influential.

The qualitative results showed that tramping activities influenced the improvement of

the students’ environmental attitudes. Sara believed that the tramping activity had developed

her feelings of concern towards the natural environment. Mrs Lina (teacher) also believed

that the tramping activities had developed the students’ sense of appreciation towards the

natural environment. The influence of tramping activities on the improvement of the students’

environmental attitudes in the present study supports several qualitative study findings

(Haluza-Delay, 2001; Hammitt, 1995; McRae, 1990b). However, it is important to note that

the age of the participants in these studies are different to the present study.

Among possible explanations for the influence of tramping on the improvement of

environmental attitudes in the present study are: (1) the provision of opportunities for direct

human-nature relationships; (2) the potential for students to see the human impact on the

natural environment, and; (3) the opportunity for environmental knowledge reinforcement of

in-class learning.

Sara perceived the tramping activity provided her with direct experiences that

developed her awareness of the natural environment. [After the tramp] I feel like I should look for the environment more…and ah,…kind of when you [are] going on tramp, you were not allowed to talk loud because it would scare all of the birds away…[you had to] just to look them quietly and keep walking…yeah.

David believed that tramping allowed himself and his friends to assess human impact

on the natural environment

The things that I have figured out myself like on the tramp when I was just looking down from the top…it looks really nice and to think like the walking track is being made. They must have like pulled down the trees all sorts like to do that.

These direct experiences for assessing human impact on the natural environment may

have developed their awareness and concern for their future actions towards the natural

environment and may have also influenced the improvement of their environmental attitudes.

The researcher theorises that the tramping activities provided environmental knowledge

and reinforcement of the students’ previous learning experiences. Before the camp they had

learned about the bush community topic (various layers of trees and plants), the

environmental care code and proper tramping technique. This knowledge may have been


87

reinforced in the tramping activity as the teacher gave little explanation about the bush

community and the effects of human activities on the natural environment. In addition, there

was positive responsible environmental behaviour adaptation where two of the students who

picked up rubbish during the tramping trip were acknowledged in front of the group. It is

suggested that these experiences interacted with the students’ pre camp experiences, thus

reinforced their knowledge and feelings of concern for the natural environment.

Minimal impact camping practices

Some researchers believe that camping activities contribute to the improvement of

environmental attitudes because they are associated with minimal impact camping (MIC)

practices (Henchey & Carvajal, 2000; Schatz, 1994). MIC involves outdoor living skills that

have little effects on the natural environment and are also called ‘no trace’ or ‘low impact’

camping techniques (Christensen & Cole, 2000).

Mr Robin (parent) believed the MIC techniques practiced in this camp were among the

influential factors for improving students’ environmental attitudes. From his own experiences

he believed that these practices provided the students with basic environmental knowledge

and feelings of concern towards the natural environment.

If I take my kids camping, I will educate them in everything, from where you [should] camp, is it safe, the water cleanliness, litter, the toilet condition and how deep it should be and you should leave the place [as] how you find it. Use only fallen wood, broken branches, trees etc. And if you start and add it in an early phase of the kids, then they are going to remember things like that in the future. Mr Robin’s idea was supported through the researcher’s observations. He found that

the students were conscientious with cleanliness and their impact on the camp’s natural

surroundings. While tramping they walked in single lines, appeared in tune with their natural

surroundings (e.g. birds, plants), and picked up rubbish. These practices may have

developed their awareness about the fragility of the natural environment and may have

influenced the improvement of their environmental attitudes.

However, the effectiveness of MIC techniques in minimising environmental problems is

still uncertain as it involves long periods of adaptation, and depends on individual acceptance

(Christensen & Cole, 2000). Brookes (1994) and Haluza-Delay (1999) highlight that MIC

techniques may create a sense of human-nature separation as it assumes humans as apart

from nature. In addition, Simpson (1993; p.35) argued that MIC might create a practice of

anthropocentrism in the outdoors as “…majority of the MIC techniques are aimed at

protecting the recreational experiences of others using the resource”.

Some of the aspects of MIC are contentious as they are said to protect immediate

environments at the expense of other areas of the planet (e.g. Brookes, 1994; Haluza-Delay,


88

1999). The use of stoves for cooking, as a MIC for example, may reduce the loss of natural

firewood within the immediate environment but requires the extraction of iron, rubber and

gases from other places. Supporters of the deep ecology movement would suggest MIC

does not delve deeply enough into global ecological issues, does not reduce total

consumption of non-renewable resources worldwide, and may in fact contribute to ongoing

ecological harm.

Despite such critiques, the researcher believes that MIC does indeed present a positive

contribution to the protection of the environment. This study’s interview and observation data

suggests that MIC might develop knowledge and positive attitudes about the natural

environment which may be a predictor for future environmental action (Dresner & Gill, 1994;

Mittelstaedt et al.1999). In support, Cooper (1997, p.25) stated, “This awareness [from MIC

practices] of how we relate to the natural systems can enhance our own enjoyment and

appreciation of the outdoors and may help us to ‘tread more lightly’ in other aspects of our

lives”.

The researcher is also supportive of transferring or applying the MIC practices into

daily life. In doing this, the roles of the teacher or outdoor educator are crucial, especially in

planning the outdoor programmes, teaching strategies, and the MIC practices to be

applicable (Haluza-Delay, 1999).

From the researcher’s observations, the process of linking MIC practices into daily life

has not been made explicit at this camp. For example, there was lack of reinforcement of the

positive or negative impacts of the camp’s daily cleaning activities towards the natural

environment. This was a great opportunity to discuss the impact of human daily practices on

the environment (e.g. sewerage from the cleaning activities, rubbish from the foods’

packaging, etc). Based on these observations, the possibility for the students to transfer the

camp’s MIC practices into their daily life is uncertain.

Deep environmental thinking

The qualitative data showed evidence of deep environmental thinking from some of the

students interviewed. This is exemplified by David’s statement which described the

uniqueness of his first night experiences. Umm…like sleeping in the tent I heard the rain falling on the roof and I heard noises outside like cows [and] I think there was a dog.. It is just better than sleeping at your bed at home when you hear nothing except maybe parents talking and cars going past. And yeah…like sleeping in the tent [at that] night…it was raining and it was just pouring down and there was people moving and there was trees rustling in the wind and the creek running, and the animals’ sound is beautiful.


89

David also raised his concern about human impact during the process of building the

tramping track The things that I have figured out myself like on the tramp when I was just looking down from the top…it looks really nice and to think like the walking track is being made. They must have like pulled down the trees all sorts like to do that.

Deep environmental thinking may have influenced the development of potentially

critical environmental thinking among the interviewed students. Instead of raising concerns

about environmental problems in their daily life, the students wished to transfer the improved

environmental attitudes into action. Sara believed that she will practice the improved

attitudes into daily action and wanted her daily life environment to be as pristine as the bush.

Mike also believed that he would transfer the improved attitudes into environmental action

and influence other people to do the same. Yes definitely [I will practice my environmental attitudes into daily living]. I will help pick up litter and make sure people protect the environment. (Mike)

The students’ deep and potentially critical environmental thinking could be linked with

the objective of the Health and Physical Education curriculum. Under the objectives of the

people and the environment, the curriculum requires the students to critically think about and

contribute to social change in improving the quality of the environment (Ministry of

Education, 1999c). However one interesting question to be asked is, if environmental

education is not one of the main foci in this camp then how does it foster environmental

learning outcomes?

One possible explanation for this situation lies in Mike’s statement. When asked about

the elements that influenced the process of deep and critical environmental thinking, Mike

responded that experiences in the outdoors have influenced him to think about the

environment. Just being there…in the outdoors, being there will make you think about it. Thinking of how you can improve the environment.

Mike’s statement and the development of deep environmental thinking in this study are

linked with Martin’s (1999) Critical Outdoor Education (COE) Theory. The key issue of this

theory is the combination of awareness and action in generating a more environmental

friendly society. Martin predicted that the outdoors provided chances for students to

temporarily withdraw from society, their practices and surroundings. Then, they are in a

position to apply a critical ‘lens’ in examining their impact on the natural environment. The

critical thinking process could influence their future environmental attitudes and actions. In

order to generate effective COE programmes, Martin highlighted the importance of guided


90

and sequential environmental teaching processes which might include the development of a

sense of place, well planned learning content, and appropriate equipment.

This study found that although there was no specific environmental teaching and

guidance in most of the camp’s activities, some 11-year-old students (e.g. David, Mike, and

Sara) still manage to develop their deep and potentially critical environmental thinking. Based

on this situation it could be speculated that if the camp follows Martin’s suggestion, the

development of critical environmental thinking by the students may be greater.

Critical theorists argued that in changing dominant social practices, awareness must be

transferred into action (Bohman, 2001; Saul 2000). Thus one emerging question for this

study is: Will the improved environmental attitudes be transferred into behaviour especially in

daily settings? Although the interviewed students perceived that they would change their

behaviour in relation to the environment, this study only examined the effects of the camp on

the improvement of students’ environmental attitudes. Therefore, future research should

examine the influence of improved environmental attitudes on daily behaviour.

Researchers have highlighted that to transfer environmental attitudes into behaviour is

not easy since the students may perceive their home environment as different and ‘not

natural’ (see Haluza-Delay 1999, 2001). To minimise this ‘setback9’ situation, teachers and

outdoor educators need to be creative in translating the camp experiences into daily life.

Researchers suggest that this process is best practiced in post-camp reinforcement activities

(see Dresner & Gill, 1994; Hanna, 1995; Leberman, 1989). Examples are: writing an

environmental letter to parliament members, donating money to environmental trusts, and

participating in environmental clubs are among examples of post-camp reinforcement

activities.

Post-camp reinforcement activities may not have been applied in this ROE camp.

Based on the researcher’s observation during the final school visits (three days after the

camp), there was lack of evidence of post-camp environmental reinforcement activities, thus

the students improved environmental attitudes might decrease over time. This argument was

supported by Leberman’s (1989) study that found the improved conservation attitudes from

the Outdoor Pursuits Centre (OPC) adventure courses diminished over time, as there was

lack of post-camp reinforcement.

For future ROE practices, the researcher suggests the importance of a direct

environmental focus and post-camp reinforcement activities in transferring the improved

environmental attitudes into action and changing the social dominant environmental

practices. Most of these responsibilities appear to lie with the educators.

9 Not practising the improved environmental attitudes in daily life as having different perception of nature in camp and daily situation.


91

Research Question 4

If changes take place, when and how do they occur?

Results partially support Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the

Wilderness, suggesting that the process of attitudinal and behavioural changes involves

three stages: (1) the influences of predisposing factors (e.g. age, gender, place of residence,

previous experiences), and / or the improvement of knowledge and beliefs (e.g. minimal

impact camping techniques, ecological knowledge); (2) the influence of improved attitudes on

intention, and; (3) the influence of improved attention on behaviour (see Figure 1).

In this study, there was evidence of gender and previous experience differences in

outdoor and environmental activity (predisposing factors) influencing the improvement of the

students’ environmental attitudes. From the quantitative results the girls recorded stronger

environmental attitudinal improvement than boys by the end of the camp. Additionally

qualitative insights indicated the influence of previous experience in outdoor and

environmental education activity.

The Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness suggests that the improvement

in knowledge and beliefs might influence the improvement of environmental attitudes. There

was evidence of knowledge and belief improvement in this study. For example, Mike

perceived that the environmental games had improved his environmental knowledge.

Yes I do I think. I think I have [improved my environmental attitudes] because before I came um… I ‘sorta’ had a bit of an idea of what it is going to be like, but not as much as after. And after your games that you have played with us…it could [be] even bigger… and higher environmental awareness.

Sara believed that camp has provided her with environmental experiences, through

providing chances to explore and develop a personal feeling towards the natural

environment. Yeah…it make me feel closer to the environment and umm…because you can just feel like going around and feel what trees are and it is quite nice feeling and smelling the trees that were around you and…err…yeah you do not think about going around and smelling the trees before…yeah it makes me feel closer to the environment. Hanna highlighted that improved knowledge and beliefs, and the influence of

predisposing factors, may result in attitudinal change. The overall MGOAI pre and post-tests

scores for this camp indicated statistically significant improvement in the students’

environmental attitudes. From qualitative data, there was evidence of improved knowledge

and belief influences upon students’ environmental attitudes. Mike believed that after a few

camping activities he felt more concern and awareness for the environment. Such feelings of


92

concern are an affective domain of attitudes (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Fishbein & Ajzen,

1975, 1980).

In the second and third stage of the Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness,

Hanna (1995) highlighted that changes in attitudes may also enhance the process of

changing intention and behaviour towards a specific object (e.g. environment). In this study

the influence of improved environmental attitudes on intention to protect the environment

were evident from the students’ interview statements. The interviewed students believed that

they would implement the improved environmental attitudes in their daily lives. However this

study could not determine if the students’ intention to protect the environment was

transferred into behaviour as it was beyond the scope of the study. The process of attitudinal

change in this study is illustrated in Figure 17.

Although the quantitative and qualitative results indicated the influence of

predisposing factors (gender and previous experiences in outdoor and environmental

education activities) and improved environmental knowledge in influencing attitudinal

improvement, this study was unable to determine specifically when such a process had

occurred. A possible reason for this is the effects of the camp were assessed as a single

aggregate (the whole programme), therefore there were no specific assessments of each

activity (e.g. environmental games, tramping, police dog session). As a result it is hard to

determine the specific activities or times frames the predisposing factors and environmental

knowledge components of the theory influenced the students’ attitudes. In order to minimise

this issue, future research should specifically examine the effects of each activity on the

students’ environmental attitudes.

With respect to the influences of predisposing factors and improved environmental

knowledge on attitudes in ROE camps, there were similarities between this study and the

findings of Dettmann-Easler and Pease (1999), Hanna (1995) and Mittelstaedt et al.(1999).

Gender and previous experiences in outdoor and

environmental education

Improvement in environmental knowledge and beliefs


Intention to protect the environment

Figure 17: Process of environmental attitudinal change, adapted from Hanna (1995)


93

Each of these (longer-term) studies also found that the improved attitudes were transferred

into environmental intentions and daily behaviour.

According to Fishbein and Ajzen (1975, 1980) and Eagly and Chaiken (1993) the

improvement of knowledge is a predictor for improving environmental attitudes. In addition

the Centre of Educational Research Institute (1995) suggested that younger people are

salient and positive in learning about the environment. As the students in the present study

were young adolescents (11 to 13 years), and likely salient and positive in accepting new

environmental information and experiences from the camp activities, there existed potential

for improvements in their environmental knowledge. Quantitative measures and insights

have determined enhanced attitudes, thus it could be assumed that students environmental

knowledge has been enhanced.

Fishbein and Ajzen (1975, 1980) highlighted the process of changing attitudes

involved a process of interaction between the new knowledge and the old attitudes through

evaluative and meditative10 processes. In addition, Martin (1999) and Haluza-Delay (2001,

1999) suggested that processing environmental knowledge (e.g. evaluating and meditating),

and developing deep environmental thinking are best achieved through low impact and less

challenging outdoor activities. Based on these ideas the researcher suggests that the

structure of the camp’s programme may have influenced the process of attitudinal

improvement in this study, as corresponding with Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In

and For the Wilderness. It was observed that the camp programme might allow more time for

the students to process (evaluate and meditate) their knowledge through group discussion,

camp journal and personal solitude. From the interviews, the evaluative and meditative

processes of environmental knowledge were evidenced through the students’ deep

environmental thinking. These processes may have influenced the improvement of their

environmental attitudes as per Hanna’s (1995) theory.

However it is also important to note that the process of attitudinal change or

improvement in the Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness was challenged by

several previous studies. Haluza-DeLay (1999, 2001) found that students’ environmental

attitudinal improvement from a backpacking trip was not transferred into behaviour as they

had different perceptions of the outdoors and the daily life environment. Gigliotti (1992) found

that improved environmental knowledge among 1500 Cornell University students did not

drive a corresponding improvement in environmental attitudes. Gillett et al. (1991) and

Shepard and Speelman (1986) found that the improvement of environmental knowledge from

outdoor educational activities did not influence the improvement of environmental attitudes.

Moreover, several socio-psychologists have suggested that attitudes are not always a

10 Evaluative and meditative is a cognitive process of an individual where he assessed and evaluates (processing) the new knowledge or stimulus to his old attitudes. If the knowledge is relevant and the individual is motivated, attitudinal change may happen.


94

predictor of behaviour, as behaviour may also influence attitudes (Baron & Bryne, 2000;

Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Hogg & Vaughan, 1995; Taylor et al., 1994). Previous study findings

and researchers’ arguments suggested that the process of changing attitudes, and

transforming them into intention and behaviour is not a one-way process. The components of

the theory (e.g. knowledge, subjective norms, attitudes, intention, behaviour) are

interchangeable, may influence each other, and are primarily influenced by an individual’s

motivation to change (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Taylor et al., 1994).

Hanna (1995) highlighted that in order to enhance the components of the theory (e.g.

from attitude to intention and behaviour), follow-up activities are important as they reinforce

each component and motivate people to change. In ROE camp settings, a well planned

program, pre-camp exposure to environmental themes, a direct environmental education

focus, and post-camp reinforcement activities may be useful in changing and transferring the

environmental attitudes into behaviour.

Summary, recommendation and conclusion

This summary states the implications, future recommendations, and conclusions drawn

from the discussion of the main findings in the study. The study involved quantitative and

qualitative inquiries that assessed the effect of a residential outdoor education (ROE) camp

on the development of positive environmental attitudes.

The objectives of the study were fourfold; firstly, to investigate the effects of a ROE

camp on the development of positive environmental attitudes among intermediate school

students. Secondly, if an improvement occurred, this study attempted to examine the

influences of socio-demographics variables (gender, siblings, environmental worldviews,

preferred recreational activities, and previous experiences in outdoor and environmental

education activities). Thirdly, to examine the ROE camp elements that may be influential.

Lastly to assess the process of attitudinal change based on the students’ perceptions.

The findings of this study reinforce the body of knowledge of ROE camp in developing

positive environmental attitudes especially in:

1. Offering insights for improving the practice of future ROE camp programmes.

2. Providing a greater understanding of the process of attitudinal change that occur

during a ROE camp.

3. Extending the research literature on the effects of a ROE camp on environmental

attitudes.

4. Improving future research practices in ROE camp and environmental attitudes among

intermediate school (11 to 13 year) students.


95

The initial sections summarise the findings and suggestions from the pre, in and post-

camp activities, the fourth section provides suggestion for future research, and the fifth

section addresses the conclusion of the study.

Pre-camp

Results from the MGOAI pre-test scores indicate that students already had positive

environmental attitudes before the camp. This may have been influenced by predisposing

factors (e.g. parents, social environment) and pre-camp exposure to environmental themes.

Environmental themes such as the Environmental Care Code, Minimal Impact Camping

(MIC) practices and conservation topics were integrated into the classroom learning one

week prior to the camp. Interviews, observation and insights suggest that these pre-camp

activities might be influential. Therefore, this study suggests that future research should

include pre-camp environmental activities such as group discussions, video session and

conservation topics. These activities provide students with prior environmental focus and

experiences that might enhance attitudinal improvement during camp.

The camp

Results indicated that a four-day ROE camp programme could be effective in

developing positive environmental attitudes for intermediate age school students.

Environmental games, tramping and minimal impact camping practices were identified as

influential. There were contrasts of ideas between the teacher, students and a parent on the

importance of a direct environmental focus in the camp. The teacher perceived that an

environmental focus was more suitable in pre-camp and other curriculum subjects (e.g.

Sciences, Social Studies). In contrast, the students and a parent believed that the focus

should be implemented in the camp as it guides the students’ attention to the environment.

Based on these contrasts an examination was conducted of the school’s outdoor education

scheme and camp unit plan. Although the environment was ranked second in the scheme,

there were no specific environmental achievement objectives, learning outcomes or

assessment in the camp unit plan (see Appendix E). Most objectives and learning outcomes

are focused on self-sufficiency (e.g. working together, group planning) and outdoor pursuits

skills (river crossing, tramping). As a result it could be argued that without the researcher’s

participation (e.g. conducting the environmental games), a direct environmental focus might

not have been applied. This again raised a question about current outdoor education

practices in New Zealand. Although Mackay (1981), Law (1998), and more recently Zink

(2003) had highlighted the need to balance the outdoor education foci, the issue of a lack of

environmental emphasis is most likely still a reality.


96

In order to readdress the issue of imbalance in these foci, urgent action from governing

bodies and educators are needed. Associations such as Outdoors New Zealand (ONZ),

Education Outdoor New Zealand (EONZ), and the New Zealand Outdoor Instructors (NZOIA)

could play a more active role in addressing this issue for the practitioners and the public.

Nationwide conferences and workshops, publications such as journals and magazines,

distributing free newsletters to public and educational institutions, an update of recent

research findings in the internet and curriculum refinement might be useful.

Outdoor educators should highlight and implement an environmental focus in their

programmes. Although there are still debates on the effectiveness of a direct environmental

focus on attitudes (Eagles & Demare, 1999), several others (including this study) have found

positive influences (Dettmann-Easler & Pease, 1999; Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt et al.,

1999). Furthermore, Dettmann-Easler and Pease (1999) suggested that learning about the

environment is more effective in the outdoors than in classroom. In support, the interviewed

students believed that learning for the environment is best done in the outdoors as it provides

direct and hands-on experience which develops their deep empathy and concern towards the

environment. For future practice, the implementation of environmental activities such as

environmental games, bush studies and personal solitude combined with social and personal

development and outdoor pursuits might assist in balancing the outdoor education foci.

The process of attitudinal improvement in this study partially supported Hanna’s

(1995) Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness. The theory assumes that

predisposing factors and knowledge and beliefs influence the process of attitudinal

improvement. In terms of the predisposing factors component of the theory, this study found

gender and previous experiences in outdoor and environmental education activities to be

influential. In this study, girls developed stronger attitudes than boys. Recent literature

supports the researcher’s observations suggesting individual and gender learning differences

may be influential. Feingold (1993), Klienfeld (1998) and Weinburgh (1994) highlight that

boys are more interested, for example, in subjects that involve physical activities while girls

are more involved in ‘feeling’ activities. Therefore, it is important for outdoor educators to

take account of both gender and individual learning differences. To enhance environmental

learning outcomes for both gender groups, future ROE camp programmes should put equal

emphasis on environmental adventure (e.g. personal solitude, sense of place) and involved

‘feeling’ activities (e.g. environmental arts, songs, and drama).

As previous outdoor and environmental education activities were also found to be

influential, this study suggests educational administrators and teachers maximise their

school’s outdoor and environmental education programmes. Other than ROE camp,

weekend outdoor environmental trips and field studies might be useful in enhancing the

students’ attitudes. Additionally, an integration of environmental learning strategies such as

sense and knowledge of place in some outdoor adventure activities might enhance the


97

feelings of concern for the environment and minimise the perception of nature as only a play

land (Haluza-Delay, 1999).

Post-camp

The deep ecologists and outdoor education theorists highlight the importance of

transferring improved attitudes into action to minimise environmental problems (Haluza-

Delay, 2001, 1999; Martin, 1999). In addition, the Theory of Involvement In and For the

Wilderness suggests that improvement in environmental attitudes and individual motivation

to change might influence the development of intention and behaviour.

This study highlighted the influence of improved attitudes on the development of

intention to protect the environment. However the researcher was unable to assess the

influence of environmental intention onto behaviour as it was beyond the scope of the study.

Future researchers are encouraged to assess the influences of improved environmental

attitudes and intention on behaviour. In doing this, a longitudinal study (e.g. three months or

one year after the camp) is needed.

Dettmann-Easler and Pease (1999) and Leberman (1989) highlighted post-camp

reinforcement activities as important in order to transfer improved attitudes into intention and

behaviour. Through observation and discussion with the classroom teacher during the final

school visits (three days after the camp), there was lack of evidence of post-camp

environmental reinforcement activities. Thus the improved attitudes and intention might be

decreased over time. Leberman (1989) highlighted the lack of post-camp reinforcement

activities resulted on the decreasing of conservation attitudes in her study. For future practice

this study suggests the importance of post-camp reinforcement activities such as writing an

environmental letter, designing environmental protection signage and participation in

environmental clubs. These activities might reinforce the students’ attitudes and motivate

them to practice their improved attitudes into daily behaviour.

Suggestion for future research

1. For future research a pre camp investigation is suggested, to better understand the

predisposing factors and/or previous environmental knowledge and beliefs that might

influence the development of positive environmental attitudes among the students.

2. It is important to address that this study only examined the short-term effects of one

specific camp. It is suggested for future research to continue such a study for a longer

period of time (e.g. three months, one year after the camp). Future researchers are


98

also encouraged to assess the influence of longer ROE camps on the development of

environmental attitudes, as there is still lack of research in this area.

3. The Theory of Involvement In and For the Wilderness assumes that predisposing

factors, and knowledge influences the development of environmental attitudes.

Although both of these components were found to be influential, this study was unable

to determine when or in which activity the influences occurred, because the effects of

the camp were assessed as a single aggregate (whole programme). In order to better

understand this process, an examination of each camp activity is suggested.

4. There was a lack of in-depth qualitative data in this study. As the students were of a

younger age, they may have been nervous during the interviews. To minimise this

situation, future research could utilise other qualitative inquiry techniques such as

writing environmental stories or drawing pictures.

5. This study indicated the influence of direct and indirect environmental activities on the

improvement of the students‘ attitudes. For further understandings future researchers

should compare the effects of direct and indirect environmental foci. In addition, further

research is required to examine the effects of outdoor or recreational programs without

a direct environmental focus, as many studies have highlighted this issue (see Dunlap

& Heffernan, 1975; Haluza-Delay, 2001, 1999; Leberman, 1989; Mackay, 1981).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study details the effects of a ROE camp and socio-demographic

variables on the development of positive environmental attitudes and identifies the elements

of the camp that influence students’ attitudes. This study also details the process of

attitudinal change in a ROE camp setting.

The findings of the study support the notion that a ROE camp is effective in

influencing the improvement of environmental attitudes. Gender, previous experiences in

outdoor and environmental education activities, and direct and indirect environmental focus

activities were found to be influential, thus supporting several previous studies (e.g.

Hammerman et al., 2001; McRae, 1990; Millward, 1974; Mittelstaedt et al., 1999). In addition,

the process of attitudinal changes corresponds with Hanna’s (1995) Theory of Involvement In

and For the Wilderness. Issues of imbalance in outdoor education curriculum foci are

addressed, and a framework for future practice and research is suggested.


99

References

Abbott, C. (1990). Outdoor education in New Zealand: General overview. In K. McRae (Ed.),

Outdoor and environmental education: Diverse purposes and practices (pp. 307 -

311). Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia Pty. Ltd.

Atkinson, G. (1990). Outdoor recreation's contribution to environmental attitudes. Journal of

Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 61(4), 46 - 48.

Baron, R. A., & Bryne, D. (2000). Social Psychology (9th ed.). California: Ally & Bacon

Publishers.

Baumgartner, T. A., Strong, C. H., & Hensen, L. D. (2002). Conducting and reading research

in health and human performance (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher

Education.

Bechtel, R. B. (1997). Environment and behaviour: An introduction. California: Sage

Publications.

Benenati, F. (1992). Fun for a week environmental awareness for a lifetime. The

Conservationist, 46(6), 26 - 29.

Bogner, F. X. (1998). The influence of short-term outdoor ecology education on long-term

variables of environmental perspective. Journal of Environmental Education, 29(4),

17 - 29.

Bohman, J. (2001). Critical Theory. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International

Encyclopaedia of the Social and Behavioural Sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 2986 - 2990).

Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Boyes, M. A. (2000). The place of outdoor education in the health and physical education

curriculum. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 33(2), 75-88.

Brookes, A. (1994). Reading between the lines: Outdoor experience as environmental text.

Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 65(8), 28 - 33.


100

Burrus-Bammel, L. L., & Bammel, G. (1990). Outdoor/Environmental education: An overview

for the wise use of leisure. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance,

61(4), 49 - 54.

Caiazza, A., & Barrett, A. (2003). Engaging women in environmental activism:

Recommendation for Rachel's network. Washington: Institute for women's policy

research.

Callicott, J. B. (2000). Harmony between man and land: Aldo Leopold and the foundation of

ecosystem management. Journal of Forestry, 98(5), 4 - 13.

Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (1995). Environmental learning for the 21st

century. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.

Charpentier, H. (1992). A place to share. Camping Magazine, 64, 59.

Chawla, L. (1999). Live paths into effective environmental action. Journal of Environmental

Education, 31(1), 15 - 26.

Chenery, M. F. (1994). Explaining the value of camp. Camping Magazine, 66, 20 - 25.

Christensen, N. A., & Cole, D. N. (2000). Leave no trace practices: Behaviours and

preferences of wilderness visitors regarding use of cook stoves and camping away

from lakes. Paper presented at the USDA Forest Service Proceedings, Rocky

Mountain Research Station.

Christy, W. R. (1982). Assessment of the effects of two residential camp settings on

environmental attitude development. Unpublished master's dissertation, Virginia

Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia.

Cooper, G. (1996). The role of outdoor education in education for the 21st century. Australian

Journal of Outdoor Education, 1(3), 10 - 14.

Cooper, G. (1997). How outdoor education contributes to sustainability. Horizons, Spring(1),

23 - 27.

Cornell, J. (1989). Sharing the joy of nature: Nature activities for all ages. California: Dawn

Publications

Cothrell, S. P., & Graefe, A. R. (1997). Testing a conceptual framework of Responsible

Environmental Behaviour. Journal of Environmental Education, 29(1), 17 - 27.

Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. California:

Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approaches. United States of America: Sage Publications.

Crompton, J. L., & Sellar, C. (1981). Do outdoor education experiences contribute to positive

development in the affective domain? Journal of Environmental Education, 12(4), 21 -

29.

Culpan, I. (1998). Physical Education in the new curriculum: Are we agents of the state?

Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 31(1), 3 - 8.


101

Dahlgren, L. O., & Szczepanski, A. (1998). Outdoor education: Literary education and

sensory experience. Tingshustorget: Kunskapscentrum i Kinda.

Daigle, J. J., Hrubes, D., & Ajzen, I. (2002). A comparative study of beliefs, attitudes, and

values among hunters, wildlife viewers, and other outdoor recreationists. Human

Dimension of Wildlife, 7, 1 - 19.

Department of Conservation. (2002). National Park. Department of Conservation. Available:

http://www.doc.govt.nz/Explore/001~National-Parks/index.asp [2004, 12th February].

DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L. N. (1998). Introduction to research: Understanding and applying

multiple strategies. Minneapolis: Mosby Inc.

Dettmann-Easler, D., & Pease, J. L. (1999). Evaluating the effectiveness of residential

environmental education programs in fostering positive attitudes toward wildlife.

Journal of Environmental Education, 31(1), 33 - 39.

Donaldson, G. E., & Donaldson, L. E. (1958). Outdoor education: A definition. Journal of

Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 29(17), 63 - 66.

Dowling, R. (Ed.). (1978). An introduction to environmental education. Christchurch:

Canterbury Environment Centre Inc.

Drengson, A. (1997). An ecophilosophy approach, the deep ecology movement, and diverse

ecosophies. The Trumpeter, 14(3), 110 - 111.

Dresner, M., & Gill, M. (1994). Environmental education at summer nature camp. Journal of

Environmental Education, 25(3), 35 - 41.

Driver, B. L., & Johnson, L. A. (1984). A pilot study of the perceived long-term benefits of the

Youth Conservation Corps. Journal of Environmental Education, 15(2), 3 - 11.

Dunlap, R. E., & Heffernan, R. B. (1975). Outdoor recreation and environmental concern: An

empirical examination. Rural Sociology, 40, 18 - 30.

Dunlap, R. E., & Jones, R. E. (2002). Environmental Concern: Conceptual and measurement

issues. In R. E. Dunlap & W. Michaelson (Eds.), Handbook of environmental

sociology (pp. 483 - 524). Westport: Greenwood Press.

Eagles, P., & Demare, R. (1999). Factors influencing children's environmental attitudes.


Eagles, P., & Muffitt, S. (1990). An analysis of children's attitudes toward animals. Journal of


Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Texas: Hartcourt Brace.

Eberstadt, N. (2000). World population prospects for the twenty-first century: The spectre of

"depopulation"? In R. Bailey (Ed.), Earth report 2000: Revisiting the true state of the

planet. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Ewert, A. (1987). Research in outdoor adventure: overview and analysis. The Bradford

Papers Annual, 2, 15 - 28.


102

Ewert, A. (1989). Outdoor adventure pursuits: Foundations, models, and theories. Ohio:

Publishing Horizons Inc.

Feingold, A. (1993). Cognitive gender differences. Sex Roles, 29(1), 91 - 111.

Fishbein, M. (1967). Attitude theory and measurement. California: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Beliefs, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to

theory and research. Madison: Addison - Wesley.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1980). Understandings attitudes and predicting social behaviour:

Introduction to theory and research. Reading. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Ford, P. (1986). Outdoor education: Definition and philosophy (ERIC Digests in full text).

New Mexico: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.

Fortner, R. W., & Lyon, A. E. (1985). Effects of a Costeau Television special on viewer

knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Environmental Education, 16, 12 - 20.

Fuller, S. (1998). Environmental education. Earth Island Journal, 13(4), 6 - 7.

Gair, N. P. (1997). Outdoor education: Theory and practice. London: Cassel Publishing.

Gigliotti, L. M. (1992). Environmental attitudes: 20 years of change? Journal of


Gillett, D. P., Thomas, G. P., Skok, R. L., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1991). The effects of

wilderness camping and hiking on the self-concept and the environmental attitudes

and knowledge of twelfth graders. Journal of Environmental Education, 22(3), 33 - 44.

Gordon, B., & Dodunski, R. (1999). A study of the effect of an outdoor education experience

on students perceptions of their peers. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand,

32(2), 16 -18.

Greene, J. C. (Ed.). (2001). Mixing social inquiry methodologies (4th ed.). Washington:

AERA.

Grove, R. (2002). Climatic fears: Colonialism and the history of environmentalism. Harvard

International Review, 23(4), 50 - 55.

Halloran, J. D. (1967). Attitude formation and change. Leicester: Leicester U.P.

Haluza-DeLay, R. (1999). The culture that constrains: Experience of "nature" as a part of a

wilderness adventure program. Journal of Experiential Education, 22(3), 129 - 137.

Haluza-Delay, R. (2001). Nothing here to care about: Participant constructions of nature

following a 12-day wilderness program. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4),

43 - 50.

Haluza-Delay, R. (Ed.). (1999). Navigating the terrain: Helping care for the environment.

Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing Inc.

Hammerman, D. R., Hammerman, W. M., & Hammerman, E. L. (2001). Teaching in the

outdoors (5th ed.). Illinois: Interstate Publishers Inc.


103

Hammersley, M. (Ed.). (1996). The relation between quantitative and qualitative research:

Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism. Leicester: The British

Psychological Society.

Hammitt, J. P. (1995). Responsible environmental behaviour: Metaphoric transference of

minimum impact. Unpublished master's dissertation, University of Montana, Montana.

Hampton, B., & Cole, D. (1988). Soft paths: How to enjoy the wilderness without harming it.

United States of America: Stackpole Books.

Hanna, G. (1995). Wilderness related environmental outcomes of adventure and ecology

education programming. Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 21 - 32.

Hayllar, B. (Ed.). (1990). Residential outdoor education. Melbourne: Macmillan Education

Australia Pty. Ltd.

Henchey, K., & Carvajal, M. (2000). Reducing your impact: Tips for treading softly on mother

earth. The Camping Magazine, 73, 38 - 42.

Henderson, K. A. (1990). Deep ecology and outdoor recreation: Incompatible? Journal of

Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 61(3), 77 - 80.

Henderson, R. (1999). The place of deep ecology and ecopsychology in adventure

education. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure programming. Pennsylvania:

Venture Publishing Inc.

Higgins, P. (1996). Connection and consequences in outdoor education. Journal of

Adventure Education and Leadership, 13(2), 34 - 39.

Hogg, M. A., & Vaughan, G. M. (1995). Social psychology: An introduction. London: Prentice

Hall.

Hollweg, K. S. (1997). Are we making a difference? Lessons learned from VINE program

evaluations. Washington: North American Association for Environmental Education.

Jackson, E. L. (1986). Outdoor recreation participant and attitudes to the environment.

Leisure Studies, 5, 1 - 23.

James, T. (1995). Kurt Hahn and the aims of education. In K. Warren & M. Sakofs & J. Hunt

(Eds.), The theory of experiential education (3rd ed., pp. 33 - 43). Colorado:

Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.

Jaus, H. H. (1984). The development and retention of environmental attitudes in elementary

school children. Journal of Environmental Education, 15(3), 33 - 36.

Jeffrey, E. (2001). Breaking down the walls: Camp/school program brings diverse

communities together. Camping Magazine, 74, 21 - 22.

Kearsley, G., & Carr, A. (2000). Inter-cultural perceptions of the meaning of place: Maori and

Pakeha evaluations of tourist environments in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Dunedin:

University of Otago.

Keen, M. (1991). The effect of the Sunship Earth program on knowledge and attitude

development. Journal of Environmental Education, 22(3), 28 - 32.


104

Keighley, P. W. S. (1997). The impact of experiences out-of-doors on personal development

and environmental attitudes. Horizons, 14(2), 27 - 29.

Klienfeld, J. (1998). Why smart people believe that schools short-change girls: What you see

when you live in a tail. Gender Issues, 16(1/2), 47 - 63.

Knapp, C. E. (1999). In accord with nature: Helping students form an environmental ethic

using outdoor experience and reflection. West Virginia: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural

Education and Small Schools.

Law, B. (1998). Environmental education is education for the future. Paper presented at the

Ara Matauranga-Pathway to Learning: Third National Outdoor Education Conference,

Auckland College of Education.

Law, B., & Baker, R. (1995). Draft curriculum guidelines for environmental education.

Unpublished manuscript, Wellington.

Leberman, S. I. (1989). The Outdoor Pursuits Centre of New Zealand: Its role and

effectiveness in generating a change in students' image of the outdoors and

conservation. Unpublished master's dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington,

Wellington.

Lee, R. M. (2000). Unobtrusive methods in social research. California: Open University

Press.

Leeming, F. C., Dwyer, W. O., Porter, B. E., & Cobern, M. K. (1993). Outcome research in

environmental education: A critical review. Journal of Environmental Education, 24(4),

8 - 21.

Legge, M. (1998). Marae based education outside the classroom. Paper presented at the Ara

Matauranga Pathway to learning: Third National Outdoor Education Conference,

Auckland College of Education.

Liere, K. D. V., & Noe, F. P. (1981). Outdoor recreation and environmental attitudes: Further

examination of the Dunlap-Heffernan thesis. Rural Sociology, 46(3), 506 - 513.

Lisowski, M., & Disinger, J. F. (1991). The effect of field-based instruction on student

understandings of ecological concept. Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 19

- 23.

Loeffler, T. A. (1999). Should modern communication systems (cellular telephones) be used

in the wilderness? In S. D. Wurdinger & T. G. Potter (Eds.), Controversial issues in

adventure education: A critical examination (pp. 78 - 85). Iowa: Kendall/Hunt

Publishing Company.

Lynch, P. (1998a). The politics of outdoor education: Outdoor education and school

curriculum in New Zealand. Paper presented at the Ara Matauranga - Pathway to

Learning: Third National Outdoor Education Conference, Auckland College of

Education.


105

Lynch, P. (1998b). A romp through the past: One hundred and fifty years of New Zealand

outdoor education. Paper presented at the Ara Matauranga - Pathway to learning:

Third National Outdoor Education Conference, Auckland College of Education.

Lynch, P. (1999). Enterprise, self-help and cooperation: A history of outdoor education in

New Zealand schools to 1989. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Canterbury,

Christchurch.

Lynch, P. (2000). Fitting in and getting on: learning in the school of the outdoors. Childrenz

Issues, 4(2), 32 - 35.

Mackay, B. J. (1981). The evaluation of outcomes of resident outdoor education: A study of

selected Christchurch's schools. Unpublished master's dissertation, University of

Canterbury and Lincoln College, Christchurch.

Malore, J. (1999). Wild adventures: A guidebook of activities for building connections with

others and the earth. Maryland: Simon and Schuster Custom Publishing.

Martin, P. (1999). Critical outdoor education and nature as friend. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest

(Eds.), Adventure Programming (pp. 463 - 471). Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing

Inc.

Martin, P., & Thomas, G. (2000). Interpersonal relationship as a metaphor for human-nature

relationship. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5(1), 39 - 46.Mason, J. (2002).

Qualitative researching (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Maykut, P. S., & Morehouse, R. E. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophical

and practical guide. Washington: Falmer Press.

McEwen, D., & Cole, D. N. (1997). Campsite impact in wilderness area. Park and

Recreation, 32(2), 24 - 32.

McRae, K. (Ed.). (1990a). Fostering and environmental ethic in outdoor education.

Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia Pty Ltd.

McRae, K. (Ed.). (1990b). Introduction to the purposes and practises of outdoor education.

Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia Pty Ltd.

McRae, K. (Ed.). (1990c). Outdoor and environmental education: Diverse purposes and

practices. Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia Pty Ltd.

Meyer, K. (1994). How to shit in the woods: An environmentally sound approach to a lost art.

California: Ten Speed Press.

Millward, R. E. (1974). Influence of a resident outdoor program on the attitudes of sixth grade

students toward outdoor concepts using two teaching methods. Unpublished Ed.D

thesis, Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.

Ministry for The Environment. (1994). Environment 2010 Strategy. Wellington: Ministry for

The Environment.


106

Ministry for The Environment. (1996). Learning to care for our environment: Perspectives on

environmental education: A discussion document. Unpublished manuscript,

Wellington.

Ministry of Education. (1992). Anywhere everywhere: EOTC curriculum guidelines for

primary schools, secondary schools, and early childhood centres. Wellington: Ministry

of Education.

Ministry of Education. (1999a). Environmental education in New Zealand schools.

Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Ministry of Education. (1999b). Health and physical education in the New Zealand

curriculum. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Ministry of Education. (1999c). Science in the New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington.

Ministry of Education. (1999d). Social Studies in the New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington.

Mittelstaedt, R., Sanker, L., & VanderVeer, B. (1999). Impact of a week-long experiential

education program on environmental attitude and awareness. Journal of Experiential

Education, 22(3), 138 - 148.

Musser, L. M., & Diamond, K. E. (1999). The children's attitudes toward the environment

scale for preschool children. Journal of Environmental Education, 30(2), 23 - 30.

Patterson, J. (1994). Maori environmental virtues. Environmental Ethics, 16(4), 397 - 408.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). California:

Sage Publication.

Paxton, T., & McAvoy, L. (2000). Social psychological benefits of a wilderness adventure

program. Paper presented at the USDA Forest Service Proceedings, United States of

America.

Pelstring, L. (1997a). Measuring environmental attitudes: The new environmental paradigm.

Available: http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/gallery/pelstrng/lisap.htm [2002, 18th

November].

Pelstring, L. (1997b). The NEP and measurement validity. Available:

http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/tutorial/pelstrng/validity.htm [2002, 4th December].

Pennington, D. C., Gillen, K., & Hill, P. (1999). Social Psychology. London: Arnold

Publishers.

Perdue, R. R., & Warder, D. S. (1981). Environmental education and attitude change.


Priest, S. (1986). Redefining outdoor education: A matter of many relationships. Journal of


Priest, S. (1989). International experts rank critical outdoor leadership concerns and

components. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 60(2), 72 - 77.

Priest, S. (1999). Research in adventure programming. In J. C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.),

Adventure programming (pp. 309 - 317). Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing Inc.


107

Punch, S. (2002). Interviewing strategies with young people: The 'secret box' stimulus

material and task-based activities. Children and Society, 16, 45 - 56.

Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-

researchers (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Russel, S. M. (2001). Environmental values, attitudes and behaviours: Issues of

sustainability for New Zealand's international backpacker market. Unpublished

master's dissertation, University of Otago, Dunedin.

Ryan, C. (1991). The effect of a conservation program on schoolchildren's attitudes toward

the environment. Journal of Environmental Education, 22(4), 30 - 35.

Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K.

Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 769 -

802). London: Sage Publishers.

Saul, D. (2000). Expanding environmental education: Thinking critically, thinking culturally.


Schatz, C. (1994). Minimum-impact camping in the front woods. The Camping Magazine, 66,

26 - 31.

Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism,

hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),

Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 189 - 214). California: Sage Publications Inc.

Scott, D., & Willits, F. K. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behaviour: A Pennsylvania

survey. Environment and Behaviour, 26(2), 239-260.

Shepard, C. L., & Speelman, L. R. (1986). Affecting environmental attitudes through outdoor

education. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(2), 20 -23.

Smith, J. W., Carlson, R. E., Donaldson, G. W., & Masters, H. B. (1972). Outdoor education

(2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

Suzuki, D. T. (1999). Saving the earth for future generations. Public Management, 81(8), 11 -

17.

Szagun, G., & Pavlov, V. I. (1995). Environmental awareness: A comparative study of

German and Russian adolescents. Youth and Society, 27(1), 93 - 112.

Tarrant, M. A., & Cordell, H. K. (1997). The effect of respondent characteristics on general

environmental attitude-behaviour correspondence. Environment and Behaviour,

29(5), 618 - 637.

Tarrant, M. A., & Green, G. T. (1999). Outdoor recreation and the predictive validity of

environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences, 21, 17 - 30.

Taylor, S. E., Peplau, L. A., & Sears, D. O. (1994). Social psychology (8th ed.). Englewood

Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook

and resource (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.


108

Theodori, G. L., Luloff, A. E., & Willits, F. K. (1998). The association of outdoor recreation

and environmental concern: Re-examining the Dunlap-Heffernan thesis. Rural

Sociology, 63(1), 94 - 108.

Thomas, G., & Thomas, J. (2000). Moving water paddling as critical outdoor education.

Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5(1), 47 - 54.

Thomas, J. R., & Nelson, J. K. (2001). Research method in physical activity (4th ed.). Illinois:

Human Kinetics.

Tikka, P. M., Kuitunen, M. T., & Tynys, S. M. (2000). Effects of educational background on

students' attitudes, activity levels and knowledge concerning the environment. Journal

of Environmental Education, 31(3), 12 - 19.

Weinburgh, M. H., & Englehard, G. J. (1994). Gender, prior academic performance and

beliefs as predictors of attitudes toward Biology laboratory experiences. School

Science and Mathematics, 94(3), 118 - 123.

Wiegel, R., & Wiegel, J. (1978). Environmental concern: The development of a measure.

Environment and Behaviour, 10(1), 3 - 15.

Williams, A. H. (2001). Politics, curricula and outdoor education: A New Zealand perspective.

Unpublished Postgraduate Diploma Dissertation, University of Otago, Dunedin.

Wright, S. (1997). Agassiz Village: Case history of a residential field experience. Journal of

Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 68(2), 53 - 57.

Zink, R. (2003). Abseiling at five, rafting at ten, what do we do with them when they are 15?

New Zealand Journal of Outdoor Education, 1(2), 56 - 62.


109

Appendix A: Questionnaire

Millward Ginter Outdoor Attitude Inventory (MGOAI)


110


111


112


113


114


115


116

Appendix B: Students interview guide

These sample questions provided topic checklists that will be covered during each of the

interviews and were brought up randomly based upon the flow of discussion. The wording of

the subsequent discussions and questions may vary greatly to those provided in this

document.

1. Orienting process

1.1. Introduce researcher

1.2. Purpose of the study

1.3. Rights as participants

1.4. Taping of interviews

2. Introductory questions

2.1. How much experience have you had in the outdoors?

2.2. How often do you spend time in a natural environment (e.g. national park,

bush, beaches, rivers)?

2.3. Why do you like / do not like spending time in natural environment?

3. Information about the camp

3.1. Would you please describe your personal feelings while participating in this

camp

3.2. What have you learnt in this camp?

3.3. What are the special things that you really like in this camp?

4. Camp activities that promotes environmental attitudes


117

4.1. Do you think that this camp experience has developed your environmental

attitudes?

4.1.1. If your answer is yes, why?

4.1.2. If your answer is no, why?

4.2. What are the main activities that promote your environmental attitudes?

4.3. Please describe the specific criteria of the activity that brings you closer to

nature.

4.4. Will the awareness that you have gained in this camp be transferred into your

daily life?

4.5. Are there any external factors other than this camp itself that might influence

your environmental attitudes? Please describe

4.6. Are there any incidents/activities in this camp that could prevent positive

environmental attitudes being developed?

4.7. What is your feeling/perception/attitudes towards the natural environment

before attending this camp?

4.8. What is your feeling/perception/attitudes towards the natural environment

while participating in this camp?

4.9. What is your feeling/perception/attitudes towards the natural environment after

this camp?

5. Camp effectiveness

5.1. Do you want to attend any similar camp likes this in the future?

5.2. Do you think that this camp has effectively promotes environmental attitudes

among the participants?

6. Students perception about nature and the environment

6.1. What are the major environmental problems today?

6.2. How could these environmental problems be minimised?

6.3. Please describe your expectation/hope for the environment in the future?


118

Appendix C: Ethics committee approval


119

Appendix D: The school’s outdoor education documents

Aims and objectives Aims:

• To develops self-esteem, self-confidence, independence, and skills through

experiences outside the classroom.

• To allow the children to appreciate the value and excitement of the environment at

first hand.

• To help learners develop an attitude of responsibility, particularly towards their own

safety and that of others.

Learning objectives:

• To provide opportunities to enrich and compliment the classroom programme.

• To provide opportunities that further develop skills in observation, recording and

reporting.

• To help learners develop respect for themselves and others by providing them with

opportunities for personal and social development.

• To promote appreciation of our cultural and natural heritage.

• To develop an awareness of safety and healthy routines.

• To encourage children to participate in activities outside the classroom.


120

• To develop self confidence when facing a challenge

• To promote equity by providing all learners with opportunities to develop in many

diverse ways.

• To provide experiences through which children will gain new knowledge, skills and

attitudes as well as building on those they have.

Implementation of the programme:

• Learning will occur in a progressive manner with all classes covering core topics at

appropriate times during the year, with optional topics being covered where possible.

• Unit planning is to include activities that fulfil learning outcomes and objectives.

• Specific health objectives must be included in each unit plan.

Outdoor education scheme and unit plan YEAR 7 YEAR 8 Year 7 Overnight Stay

(AO 3C1 Establishing Relationships) Skill Sequence

• Co-operative/Adventure Based Games pre-event and during

• Teach Burner use – Cook pre-cooked sausage – plan menu using foods from a set list and subject to teacher approval

• Tent pitching at school and on camp • RAM’s form modelled and then

completed for the cookout

Year 8, 4 Day Camp (AO 4A3 Safety and risk management and developing self-sufficiency in the outdoors) Skill sequence

• Co-operative/Adventure based games pre-event and during

• Cooking appropriate to the outdoors, e.g. 1 pot meals for at least 2 nights + campfire

• Staying in tents for 3 nights • RAM’s analysis and completion for

the tramp • Day tramp with river crossing

Winter tramp (AO 3 – 4A3, 3 – 4B1 Movement concepts Skill sequence

• RAM’s analysis • Create gear lists, check gear before

departure • *Investigate hypothermia • Review procedure for what to do

Revisiting kayaking (AO 4B1 Movement Skills) Skill sequence

• pool session revising capsize drill and paddle techniques

Winter tramp (4A3, 4B1 Safety and risk management)


121

when lost • *Map work

* optional

Skill sequence • Revisiting skills from Year 7 • Tramps should be in a different

area to those experienced in Year 7

Orienteering (AO 4B1 Movement Concepts) Skill sequence

• School based • Map work, coordinates, clues

Orienteering (AO 4A3, 4B1 Movement Skills) Skill sequence

• Based in local community • Compass bearings

Kayaking (AO 3B1 Movement Concept) Skill sequence

• Pool session – introduce paddle techniques, safety and complete capsize drill

Kayaking (AO 3B1 Movement Concept) Skill sequence

• Open water session • Safe entry and exit with kayak • Paddle techniques include: correct

posture, forward stroke, backward stroke, brace, turning, stopping and rafting up

Appendix E: Camp programme and unit plan

Camp programme


122

Camp’s unit plan


123

Appendix F: Letter and information sheet

Letter to school

School of Physical Education University of Otago P.O.Box 56 DUNEDIN Ph: 4795870 [email protected]

27 March, 2003.

_____________________________

_____________________________

Dear Sir,

RE: OUTDOOR EDUCATION RESEARCH PROJECT My name is Md Amin Md Taff. I am a Master’s student at the School of Physical Education, University of Otago, working under the supervision of Dr Mike Boyes. We would like your permission to participate and administer a questionnaire and short interview among students in your school outdoor education camp. The purpose of this questionnaire and the interview is to ascertain the effects of participation in a residential outdoor education camp towards the students’ environmental awareness.


124

Currently, environmental degradation has been a global serious issue. Therefore I would like to examine the role of outdoor education residential camp in promoting environmental awareness. It is hoped that the information gained from this study will support a more encompassing view of outdoor education and environmental education. The findings will be of particular interest to teachers, students and social communities. As the intended participants of the study are between 11 to 13 years old, both parental/guardian consent and the student’s consent will be obtained prior to students completing the questionnaire and interview. Please find enclosed sample copies of consent forms. Additionally, a copy of the information sheet, which provides details of the study, has been included for your perusal. If your school is interested in participating or has any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the researchers. A plain language summary report of the completed study will be distributed to the school and the participants on request. Thank you for taking the time to consider participating in this study. Yours sincerely, Md Amin Md Taff B.ed. Sports Science

Information sheet and consent form for Principal

DRAFT

RESIDENTIAL OUTDOOR EDUCATION CAMP AND ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES: A CASE STUDY

Information sheet for Principal

Dear Sir, Thank you for showing interest in this study. Please read this information sheet carefully before deciding whether or not to let your students participate in this study. If you decide to participate, we thank you. I f you decide not to take part, there will be no disadvantage to you of any kind and we thank you for considering our request.

What is the aim of the study? The aim of the study is to explore the effects of participating in a residential outdoor education camp towards participants’ environmental attitudes.

This study is being undertaken as a part of the requirements of the degree of Masters in Physical Education at the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

What types of participants are being sought?


125

Primary school students aged between 11 to 13 years old that involved in a residential outdoor education camp.

What will your students be asked to do? Should you agree to take part in this study, your students will be asked to respond sets of questionnaires at the beginning and the end of the camp. Some of them will be interviewed in order to justify the output of the camp towards environmental attitudes. It might also require a second meeting to ensure that the correct meaning had been interpreted from the transcripts of the first interview.

Can participants change their mind and withdraw from the project? The students may withdraw any information given or from participation in the study at any time without any explanation or disadvantage to themselves of any kind.

What data or information will be collected and what use will be made of it? Data and information in this study will be collected using questionnaires and interviews. In interviews, the students respond will be audio taped for later analysis.

In the event that the conversation develops in such a way that the students feel hesitant or uncomfortable, they are reminded of their right to decline to answer any particular question(s) and also that they may withdraw from this study at any stage without any disadvantage to themselves of any kind.

Results of this study may be published but any data included will no way be linked to any specific participant. You are most welcome to request a copy of the results of this study if you wish. It is hoped that the project will be completed by March 2004.

The data collected will be securely stored in such way that only Amin and his supervisors will be able to obtain access to it. At the end of the project, any personal information will be destroyed immediately except that, as required by the University’s research policy, any raw data on which the results of the project depend will be retained in secure storage for five years after which it will be destroyed.

What if I have any questions? If you have any questions about our study, either now or in the future, please feel free to contact either:

Md Amin bin Md Taff Dr. Mike Boyes Masters Student Supervisor

School of Physical Education School of Physical Education

University of Otago University of Otago

Ph: 03-4795780 Ph: 03-4799056

E’mail: [email protected] E’mail: [email protected]

John Maxted


126

Supervisor

School of Physical Education

University of Otago

Ph: 03-4798649

E’mail: [email protected]

The Ethics Committee of the University of Otago has reviewed and approved this project.

RESEARCH PROJECT CONSENT FORM

Principal

I, …………………………………………(please print) have read the information sheet

regarding this project. I have had the opportunity to discuss the study and to ask questions,

which have been answered to my satisfaction. I understand that I am free to request further

information at any stage.

I know that:

The students’ participation in the project is entirely voluntary.

The students are free to withdraw from the project at any time without any

disadvantage or reason.


127

The data from the questionnaires and interviews relating to this study will be

disposed of according to department policy at the conclusion of this study.

I understand that the results of this study will be treated in strict confidence and

that the students will remain anonymous in the study.

I understand the results of this study may be published, but the students’

anonymity will be preserved at all times.

I hereby consent for this school to take place in this study.

----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------

( Signature of Principal ) ( Date )

Information sheet and consent form for parents/caregivers


Information sheet for parents/caregivers

Dear parents/caregivers, Thank you for showing interest in this study. Please read this information sheet carefully before deciding whether or not to let your sons/daughters participate in this study. If you decide to participate, we thank you. I f you decide not to take part, there will be no disadvantage to you of any kind and we thank you for considering our request.

What is the aim of the study? The aim of the study is to explore the effects of participating in a residential outdoor education camp towards participants’ environmental attitudes.

This study is being undertaken as a part of the requirements of the degree of Masters in Physical Education at the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

What types of participants are being sought?


128

Primary school students aged between 11 to 13 years old that involved in a residential outdoor education camp.

What will your sons/daughters be asked to do? Should you agree to take part in this study, your sons/daughters will be asked to respond sets of questionnaires at the beginning and the end of the camp. Some of them will be interviewed in order to justify the output of the camp towards environmental attitudes. It might also require a second meeting to ensure that the correct meaning had been interpreted from the transcripts of the first interview.

Can participants change their mind and withdraw from the project? You may withdraw any information given or from participation in the study at any time without any explanation or disadvantage to yourself of any kind.

What data or information will be collected and what use will be made of it? Data and information in this study will be collected using questionnaires and interviews. In interviews, your sons/daughters respond will be audio taped for later analysis.

In the event that the conversation develops in such a way that your sons/daughters feel hesitant or uncomfortable, they are reminded of their right to decline to answer any particular question(s) and also that they may withdraw from this study at any stage without any disadvantage to themselves of any kind.

Results of this study may be published but any data included will no way be linked to any specific participant. You are most welcome to request a copy of the results of this study if you wish. It is hoped that the project will be completed by March 2004.

The data collected will be securely stored in such way that only Amin and his supervisors will be able to obtain access to it. At the end of the project, any personal information will be destroyed immediately except that, as required by the University’s research policy, any raw data on which the results of the project depend will be retained in secure storage for five years after which it will be destroyed.

What if parents/caregivers have any questions? If you have any questions about our study, either now or in the future, please feel free to contact either:

Md Amin bin Md Taff Dr. Mike Boyes Masters Student Supervisor School of Physical Education School of Physical Education University of Otago University of Otago Ph: 03-4795780 Ph: 03-4799056 E’mail: [email protected] E’mail: [email protected] John Maxted Supervisor School of Physical Education


129

University of Otago Ph: 03-4798649 E’mail: [email protected]

The Ethics Committee of the University of Otago has reviewed and approved this project.

DRAFT


Parent/ Caregiver





My sons/daughters name is ……….……………………………….(please print)

I know that:


130

My sons/daughters participation in the project is entirely voluntary.

My sons/daughters is free to withdraw from the project at any time without any

disadvantage or reason.

The data from the questionnaires and interviews relating to this study will be

disposed of according to department policy at the conclusion of this study.

I understand that the results of this study will be treated in strict confidence and

that my son/daughter will remain anonymous in the study.

I understand the results of this study may be published, but my sons/daughters

anonymity will be preserved at all times.

I hereby consent to my sons/daughters taking place in this study.

----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------

( Signature of Parent/Caregiver ) ( Date )

Information sheet and consent form for participants


Information sheet for participants

Dear Participants, Thank you for showing interest in this study. Please read this information sheet carefully before deciding whether or not to participate in this study. If you decide to participate, we thank you. I f you decide not to take part, there will be no disadvantage to you of any kind and we thank you for considering our request. What is the aim of the study? The aim of the study is to explore the effects of participating in a residential outdoor education camp towards participants’ environmental attitudes. This study is being undertaken as a part of the requirements of the degree of Masters in Physical Education at the University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.


131

What types of participants are being sought? Primary school students aged between 11 to 13 years old that involved in a residential outdoor education camp. What will your students be asked to do? Should you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to respond sets of questionnaires at the beginning and the end of the camp. Some of you will be interviewed in order to justify the output of the camp towards environmental attitudes. It might also require a second meeting to ensure that the correct meaning had been interpreted from the transcripts of the first interview. Can participants change their mind and withdraw from the project? You may withdraw any information given or from participation in the study at any time without any explanation or disadvantage to yourselves of any kind. What data or information will be collected and what use will be made of it? Data and information in this study will be collected using questionnaires and interviews. In interviews, your respond will be audio taped for later analysis. In the event that the conversation develops in such a way that you feel hesitant or uncomfortable, you are reminded your right to decline to answer any particular question(s) and also that you may withdraw from this study at any stage without any disadvantage to yourselves of any kind. Results of this study may be published but any data included will no way be linked to any specific participant. You are most welcome to request a copy of the results of this study if you wish. It is hoped that the project will be completed by March 2004. The data collected will be securely stored in such way that only Amin and his supervisors will be able to obtain access to it. At the end of the project, any personal information will be destroyed immediately except that, as required by the University’s research policy, any raw data on which the results of the project depend will be retained in secure storage for five years after which it will be destroyed. What if I have any questions? If you have any questions about our study, either now or in the future, please feel free to contact either: Md Amin bin Md Taff Dr. Mike Boyes Masters Student Supervisor School of Physical Education School of Physical Education University of Otago University of Otago Ph: 03-4795780 Ph: 03-4799056 E’mail: [email protected] E’mail: [email protected] John Maxted Supervisor School of Physical Education University of Otago Ph: 03-4798649 E’mail: [email protected]

The ethics Committee of the University of Otago has reviewed and approved this project.


132

DRAFT


Participant






133

I am aware that:

1. My participation in this study is entirely voluntary.

2. I have the right to withdraw from the project at any time without any disadvantage.

3. The results of this project may be published, but my anonymity will be preserved.

I agree to take part in this study:

----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------

( Signature of Participant ) ( Date )

Appendix G: Lesson plan

HUMAN CAMERA Estimated time: 15 min Teaching aids: 1. 16 task cards Objectives: 1. Identify the specific features of a tree. 2. Earth stewardship and conservation 3. Develops students’ sensory awareness / observation Activities 1. In pairs, one person will be a camera while the partner will be the operator. 2. ‘The camera’ closes their eyes and ‘the operator’ leads the camera until they find an

interesting plant to take a picture of. 2. ‘The operator’ gently guides ‘the camera’ head about 30 cm from the plant. 4. Pull lightly on the ear lobe of ‘the camera’. 5. At this signal, ‘the camera’ opens his/her eyes for three seconds to record the scene.


134

6. Then ‘the operator’ takes ‘the camera’ to the starting point and asks the camera to find the objects/plants.

7. Switch roles and do the activity again. TREE HUGGING Estimated time: 15 min Teaching aids: 1. 16 task cards 2. 16 blindfold Objectives: 1. Identify the specific features of a tree. 2. Earth stewardship and conservation 3. Develops students’ sensory awareness / observation Activities: 1. In pairs, have one partner lead the other, blindfolded up to a tree. 2. The blindfolded person may touch, feel, and smell the tree with the intention of getting

to know the tree. 3. The pair must then walk away and the blindfolded is removed. 4. He/She must then try to identify which tree that he/she touched, felt, and smelt

before. 5. Switch roles and do the activity again. WHERE IS MOM (ANIMAL SOUND) Estimated time: 10 min Teaching aids: 1. 28 cards with 4 types of animals (frog, snake, cat, and mouse) 2. A bowl Objectives: 1. To identify animal sounds 2. To know the importance of each animal (predator and prey) 3. Group dividing strategy Activities 1. Each student will be given a piece of card 2. Each card is printed with an animal picture 3. Students have to identify and perform their group by only mimicking the sound and

the movement of each animal. NATURAL ALPHABET Estimated time: 30 min Teaching aids: 1. 4 sets of alphabetical letters N A T U R A L F G P 2. 4 roll of double-sided tape 3. 4 pieces of brown paper 4. 4 sets of colour pen / markers Objectives:


135

1. To identify names of natural surroundings 2. Stated the importance of each collected natural objects. 3. Develop an environmental statement / slogan for each team 4. Build a creative natural inventory sign Activities 1. Each student in-group will be given a letter of the alphabet 2. They have to collect objects in nature that starts / contains that alphabetical letter. 3. Glue the objects and the alphabets in alphabetical order to make a meaningful word

on the brown paper. 4. Develop an environmental motto / slogan for each team 5. Decorate the brown paper using their creativity Precautions 1. Do not pick living objects 2. Only draw the living objects on the brown paper MINI NATIONAL PARK Estimated time: 30 min Teaching aids: 1. 4 sets 4-meter long strings 2. 4 sets of bamboo sticks / toothpicks 3. 4 pieces of colourful flags (6 each) 4. 4 sets of colour pen / markers Objectives: 1. To identify the importance of natural environment 2. To develop a sense of awareness of a specific place 3. Earth stewardship and conservation 4. Develop and write environmental precaution signs Activities 1. The students have to find an interesting place in the bush and encircle it with the

string. 2. They have create their own mini national park 3. They also have to identify any natural attraction and unique criteria of their national

park. 4. Name their national park and decorate it with coloured flags. 5. They have to write at least 4 environmental precaution signs in their national park. 6. Select 2 tour guides to guides the visitors

Appendix H: Teacher interview guide

1. School background / history 1.1. School’s outdoor education history

1.2. School’s outdoor education practices

1.3. School’s environmental education practices

2. Student’s general background 2.1. Environmental knowledge / level


136

2.2. Camping experience

3. The main purpose of this camp 3.1. Objectives, goals, expected outcomes

3.2. Educational benefits from student’s participation in OE camp

4. Opinion about OE and Environmental attitudes 4.1. Significant outcomes of environmental attitudes from OE camp

4.2. Any environmental attitudes aspects of school’s OE camp

4.2.1. Direct

4.2.2. Indirect

5. Opinion about environmental education 5.1. In schools

5.2 In outdoor education

5.3. Should it be a subject by itself or not?

6. Opinion about the best way to build environmental attitudes among the students

Appendix I: Parent interview guide

1. Opinion about school’s OE camp 2. Benefits / outcomes of OE camp to their kids 2.1. Educational and outdoor pursuits


137

2.2. Social and personal development

2.3. Environmental attitudes

2.3.1. How

2.3.2. Why

3. Opinion about environmental activities in OE camp 3.1. Direct

3.2. Indirect

4. The effects of OE camp on their child’s environmental attitudes 5. The best solution to minimise current environmental problem 6. Opinion about environmental education in school 6.1. Subject by itself

6.2. Integrated subject

Date post:	28-Nov-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	upsi-my
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

A RESIDENTIAL OUTDOOR EDUCATION CAMP AND ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES: A CASE STUDY

Documents