Hello everyone,

In the light of this week’s lab discussions on defining the many “literacies” there are and search for perhaps a more appropriated term (such as the the term “fluency” suggested by Katie Stofer), I would like to stretch the debate to discuss Environmental Literacy (EL) in particular. So, since I wasn’t in lab this week, here is my two cents on the literary definitions of the term:

Generally, a “desired outcome” of environmental education (EE) is to create a public that is environmentally literate (whatever that means). Many EE programs and materials have this as a stated purpose. However, the definitions and measurement tools of environmental literacy (EL) has remained elusive. Some national surveys have been conducted that attempt to measure literacy of the general public. A few states have attempted to periodically survey their citizenry to gather EL data. While these are important attempts, I believe that many of the questions asked in the instruments used still lack in accurately measuring some “degree” of EL as defined in their proposals. Further, I believe that these important instruments fail to account for cultural and educational system differences and don’t always take into consideration accepted benchmarks for EE.

As the term “literacy” first appeared, it was solely associated with the idea of being able to read and write. Michaels & O’Connor (1990) attempted to provide a better understanding of the concept, proposing that “… we each have, and indeed fail to have, many different literacies. Each of these literacies is an integration of ways of thinking, talking, interacting, and valuing, in addition to reading and writing … [literacy] is rather about ways of being in the world and ways of making meaning…” 

Dinsinger & Roth (1992), in their Environmental Literacy Digest, gave credit to Charles E. Roth as the one who coined the term “environmental literacy” in 1968. They reviewed various definitions of EL, and suggested that it should be based on an ecological paradigm, which includes interrelationships between natural and social systems. A person who is environmentally literate relates his/her values with knowledge to generate action. Here is a brief list of EL definitions given by various authors and organizations since then (some referring to it as Ecological literacy), and that highlight the complexity of such discourse:

“[EL] is the capacity of an individual to act successfully in daily life on a broad understanding of how people and societies relate to each other and to natural systems, and how they might do so sustainably. This requires sufficient awareness, knowledge, skills and attitudes to incorporate appropriate environmental considerations into daily decisions about consumption, lifestyle, career, and civics, and to engage in individual and collective action.” ( Elder, 2003) 

 “Ecological Literacy presumes a breadth of experience with healthy natural systems… a broad understanding of how people and societies relate to each other and to natural systems and how they might do so sustainably… the knowledge necessary to comprehend interrelatedness… an attitude of care or stewardship… in a phrase, it is that quality of mind that seeks out connections… Ecological Literacy is driven by the sense of wonder, the sheer delight in being alive in a beautiful, mysterious, bountiful world… to become ecologically literate, one must certainly be able to read… to know what is countable and what is not… to think broadly, to know something of what is hitched to what… to see things in their wholeness… to know the vital signs of the planet… to know that our health, well-being, and ultimately our survival depend on working with, not against, natural forces…” (Orr, 1992) 

“EL is a set of understandings, skills, attitudes, and habits of mind that empowers individuals to relate to their environment in a positive fashion, and to take day-to-day and long term actions to maintain or restore sustainable relationships with other people and the biosphere … The essence of EL is the way we respond to the questions we learn to ask about our world and our relationship with it; the ways we seek and find answers to those questions; and the ways we use the answers we have found.” (Roth, 2002) 

 “Ecological Literacy is the ability to ask: And now what?” (Garret, 1999) 

“EL should aim to develop:  

  • Knowledge of ecological and social systems, drawing upon disciplines of natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities; 
  • Go beyond biological and physical phenomena to consider social, economic, political, technological, cultural, historic, moral, and aesthetic aspects of environmental issues; 
  • Recognize that the understanding of feelings, values, attitudes, and perception at the center of environmental issues are essential to analyze and resolve these issues; 
  • Critical thinking and problem-solving skills for personal decisions and public action.” (Dinsinger & Monroe, 1994) 

“EL should aim for: 

  • Developing inquiry, investigative, and analytical skills; 
  • Acquiring knowledge of environmental processes and human systems; 
  • Developing skills for understanding and addressing environmental issues; 
  • Practicing personal and civic responsibility for environmental decisions.” (NAAEE, 1999; Archie, 2003) 

 

Even though all of the definitions above have some common attributes, based wholly or in part on the AKASA (awareness, knowledge, attitudes, skills and action) components listed in the Tbilisi declaration, some different aspects and considerations are arrived at through different perspectives:

Orr and Elder’s definitions are very similar (Orr uses the term “ecological literacy” instead of “environmental literacy”). However, Orr clearly emphasizes the importance of intrinsic values and abstract feelings, as do Dinsinger and Monroe. Dinsinger and Monroe, as well as NPEEE, mention “interdisciplinary” in their definitions; The NPEEE standards and others do not include the latest thoughts and advances in EE, such as notions of sustainability, or even locally-based educational issues. Roth takes these notions into consideration when implying the necessity to understand changes. The NAAEE definition refers not only to personal action but also goes further to mention “civic” obligation.

The question about what Environmental Literacy is and what it should approach at its core are still far from being answered in a common agreement between scientists and practitioners in the field. Morrone et al (2001) reaffirm that the study of environmental literacy is relatively new, and no definition has been given to it that is universally accepted, and consequently the attributes of an environmentally literate citizen are still subject to discussion and investigation. However, what has been discussed so far in the literature, and in the thousands of meetings of the “real world of practicing Environmental Education”, are very important for the understanding of what environmental literacy should be aiming for, even if a widely accepted definition is never agreed upon.

 

Sorry for the long post if you are interested in the literature cited here visit the link and you can see my entire thesis.

http://www.iowadnr.gov/portals/idnr/uploads/REAP/files/literacy_thesis.pdf

If you are interested, my next post can be about the applied research in environmental literacy.

Hope I didn’t bore to death with this. To me is still a fascinating subject.

Thanks!

Susan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My original thesis question was: Does participating in a citizen science program give volunteers a greater understanding of the Nature of Science?  Searching the current literature, I realized most authors assumed that understanding the nature and process of science is actually useful to non-scientists.  Considering the lack of empirical data to support this assumption, it was not something I was willing to adopt uncritically.  Instead, I began “unpacking the lines” leading up to my original question, untangling the messy web all the way back to fundamental questions around science and science education.   What is the value of science?  What is the ultimate goal of science education?  Asking these questions, it’s hard not to feel like Derek Zoolander staring into a puddle (“Who am I?”), but I think they are essential for every scientist and science educator to consider.  Many of the questions I posed are ultimately unknowable, at least by me, but the process of asking them, writing about them, and discussing them with peers, professors, family, and friends has been what I consider the most valuable part of my education.

Below are several questions I’m exploring in developing the theoretical framework for my thesis.

Science Literacy

  • What is the ultimate goal of science education? What learning outcomes best support that goal?
  • As an educator, does having a clear idea of how I expect people to actually use scientific knowledge in daily life change how I frame the learning experience?
  • What is the relationship between scientific literacy and participating in scientific research?

Nature of Science (NOS)

  • When is it important for non-scientists to understand how science works as a discipline, as opposed to understanding how a particular natural phenomenon works?
  • Is inquiry-based or experiential education simply an effective and engaging approach to science education, or does it give students a deeper understanding of the nature and process of science? If students do learn more about how science works, how will they use that knowledge in the future?  How important is explicit NOS instruction?

Citizen Science (CS)

  • How do participant motivations and outcomes of CS programs differ from other informal science ed programs?  From project- and inquiry-based learning, or experiential education?
  • What science literacy goals are supported by the different models of CS projects?

Science and Democracy

  • What science knowledge do people need in order to function in a modern democratic society?  Are there any aspects of science literacy that all groups of people should know, regardless of who they are, where they live, and what their interests are?
  • What does it mean to be an “informed citizen”?

Perspectives on “doing science” and “definition of science”

  • What are all the definitions of science under which different groups of people operate?  What is the minimum threshold of engagement for someone to be “doing science”?
  • What learning outcomes are supported by “doing science”?  Why do many educators prefer that their students “do science” instead of watch a demonstration?

History of Science, Professionalization of Science, and the Novice / Expert demarcation

  • Can you do science unintentionally?  Who do you think was the first scientist?  Can you do science on a desert island?
  • At what point of being involved in science-related activities do non-experts begin to feel they are “doing science”?  What’s the difference between doing science, doing something scientifically, and doing something expertly?
  • How does the history of science and the professionalization of science over the past couple centuries influence our current definition of science?

Normative Science

  • If I was working as a scientist, what would I want my relationship with advocacy to be?  If I was working as an educator, what would I want my relationship with advocacy to be?
  • What are the special roles in society that scientists and educators have?  Are there rules each should follow in communicating science?
  • Do scientists or educators ever receive explicit instruction about how to handle their civic responsibilities as professionals?  What is lost by not asking yourself: How do my underlying values get incorporated into my science? Into how I communicate science?