• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Environmental Edudation Conference
• /
• 2002.07a
• /
• pp.52-82
• /
• 2002

• Hwankyungkyoyuk
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.90-100
• /
• 2004

This study has the goal to modify ‘Investigating and Evaluating Environmental Issues and Actions’(IEEIA) instruction in the sense of Korean ecological sociocultural characteristics and ‘ecology and environment' curriculum and to assess the effects of modified IEEIA instruction on responsible environmental behavior and associated variables in high school student. A modified pre- and post-test nonequivalent control group design was utilized with 4 intact classes from J-high school at Seo-cheon, Chungcheongnamdo. Pre- and post-test data were collected on the following variables: responsible environmental behavior, knowledge of and skill in using environmental actions strategies, in-depth knowledge about issues, and locus of control. Analysis of t-test was used to compare pretest with posttest means of treatment group and control group. In treatment group, statistically significant differences between pretest and posttest were found with all variables. The treatment was found to be more effective than the control in increasing the variables of responsible environmental behavior, knowledge of and skill in using environmental actions strategies, and locus of control.

• Hwankyungkyoyuk
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.51-67
• /
• 2002

There are some critiques of Hungerford's "responsible environmental behavior" for misinterpreting or misunderstanding the term of "behavior". Most critics such as Wals and van der Leij, Jae-Young Lee misunderstood that Hungeford and his colleagues' approach to environmental education is a sort of behaviorism which is not correct. The writer corrected them by showing the successful story of the IEEIA program from the teachers, the children, and the community members digging by the foot. The IEEIA program represents his philosophy of education which can be characterized a non-behaviorist by Wals and van der Leij, if we attempt to classify all educators as behaviorist and non-behaviorist. And the writer also criticized the critiques with the well known "professional environmental educators" in the North America who have known Hungerford's ideas in environmental education well such as Roth, McClaren, Ramsey and Hungeford himself. Ramsey and Hungeford himself.

• Hwankyungkyoyuk
• /
• v.18 no.1 s.26
• /
• pp.82-96
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study was to evaluate Korean and foreign environmental education programs: 3 Korean programs including 'Environmental Education Program' for primary school level, 'Environment' for middle school level, 'Ecology and Environment' for high school level and 2 foreign programs including 'TLSF(Teaching and Loaming for a Sustainable Future) Program and IEEIA(Investigating and Evaluating Environmental Issues and Actions) Program using IAEEC (The Inventory for Assessing Environmental Education Curricula) by Kim (2003). The IAEEC include four goal levels of the foundations level, the conceptual awareness level, the investigation level, environmental action skills level and an optical level: teaching methods and practice. The IAEEC use a 5-point Likert scale to identify the extent to which an environmental education curriculum or a program reflects the goals of environmental education. It was found that our school environmental education programs need to be more involved, especially in the areas of social foundations (political & legal); personal beliefs and values in environmental issue and the critical analysis of the issue by identifying important players' positions, beliefs, and values; and the environmental action to solve the issue and evaluate the consequences and effectiveness of the action plan. This study can provide a meaningful direction for program development in environmental education and especially provide school-teachers with reliable sources in analyzing environmental education programs for their school classes.