Tom Marcinkowski

Content Analysis of Selected Features of K-8 Environmental Education Research Studies in Turkey, 1997-2007.

This study aimed to analyze environmental education research (EER) in Turkey conducted in Grades K‐8 and published over the years 1997–2007. Due to the fact that there had been no systematic reviews of EER in Turkey prior to this time period, it was more appropriate to explore the implications of the results of this review for research policies and practices than for educational policies and practices in Grades K‐8. A substantial search of the international and national literature revealed 53 studies that fit the time frame and study characteristics. Three analyses of these studies were undertaken: (a) features of the research method; (b) socio‐demographic characteristics of the subjects; and (c) components of environmental literacy assessed. Three charts were constructed to support these analyses; e.g., one for each analysis. For analysis (a), quantitative surveys were the most common method. For analysis (b), greater attention was paid to the age, grade level, gender and residence of participating students. For analysis (c), greater attention was paid to knowledge of ecology and natural history, and knowledge of environmental problems and issues, less attention was paid to components of affect, and very little attention was paid to socio‐political‐economic knowledge, cognitive skills and environmentally responsible behavior.

Commentary on Rickinson's 'Learners and Learning in Environmental Education: A critical review of the evidence' (EER 7(3))

Three central premises are advanced in this commentary. First, the research literature in and closely related to environmental education (EE) has grown in volume and in diverse directions over the past three decades. This alone makes the task of reviewing or synthesizing EE research difficult and problematic. Second, the task of undertaking anything approaching a comprehensive review of any significant portion of that research, such as by Rickinson for the 1993-99 period, is both enormous and complex. Such efforts are to be both respected for the skill and effort involved, and carefully analyzed due to the influence that one individuals conclusions may have on thinking, research, and practice in the field. Third, due to the volume and diversity of this research, and to the magnitude and complexity of the task of reviewing it, it is my contention that this task is better undertaken by teams of researchers rather than by individual researchers working more or less alone. Reasons to support this premise are presented and discussed. In light of these three premises, recommendations for future reviews and syntheses of the EE research literature are offered.