A Performance Evaluation of Environmental Education Regional Centers: Positioning of Roles and Reflections on Expertise Development
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Academy leadership: absorbing international advances that then go through domestic conversions to develop expert EE strategies;
- Capacity building: increasing the professional competencies, attitude, and techniques of environmental educators to make them models;
- Technological support: developing technology-aided teaching methods that respond to environmental changes and technology advances;
- Research and evaluation: devising operation systems for EE institutions, mechanisms of market needs for EE personnel, integrated management tools and performance evaluation systems for EE regional centers; and
- Dissemination partnerships: networking with local partners and forming social communities on EE to promote regional EE.
- How are the performances of Taiwan’s regional EE centers in undertaking the five major mandated tasks?
- What is the perceived position between practice- and strategy-oriented roles that the regional EE centers should play?
- Are the operation teams of the regional EE centers considered adequate in the experience and expertise of leading the development of EE in their respective regions?
2. Literature Review
2.1. Regional EE Center Studies
2.2. Roles of Regional EE Centers
2.3. Evaluation of EE Regional Centers
3. Methods
3.1. Participants
3.2. Sampling
3.3. Instruments
3.3.1. The Questionnaire for the Operation Team Members of EE Regional Centers (Appendix A)
- A cross evaluation on the performances of each of all four EE regional centers in each of the five major tasks
- Perceived allocation of the percentages of the five major tasks, an item asking respondents to allocate the percentages to each of the tasks according to their perceived importance of the task
- Positioning between practice-oriented and strategy-oriented roles, indicated by one item on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (practice-oriented) to 7 (strategy-oriented)
- Main categories of subjects that EE regional centers should proactively and directly reach, with one item providing five categories from which more than one can be chosen: Corporate, schools, NGOs, EE personnel, and general public. It is followed by nine items presenting the possible reasons for the choices and measuring the extent to which respondents agreed with the reasons using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
- The attitude toward EE regional centers’ fostering the industrialization of EE, with one item using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
- Views on the legal status of EE regional centers, an item with two categories: established by the Taiwan EPA projects or established by EE Act
3.3.2. The Questionnaire for Members of EE Institutions and Facilities/Venues (Appendix B)
- Evaluation on the performances of the EE regional center in the respondent’s region in each of the five major tasks along with the associated indicators
- The topics in which one has need for capacity building or is interested
- The thematic areas of expertise in which one has need for capacity building or is interested
3.4. Data Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Demographic and Professional Profile of Respondents
4.2. Role Positioning
4.2.1. Perceived Relative Importance of the Five Major Tasks
4.2.2. Positioning between Practice-Oriented and Strategy-Oriented Roles
4.2.3. The Categories of Subjects to be Reached
4.2.4. The Attitude toward the Industrialization of EE
4.2.5. Views on the Legal Status of EE Regional Centers
4.3. Performance Evaluation
4.3.1. Total Scores of the Five Major Tasks
4.3.2. Scores of EE Regional Centers by Tasks
4.3.3. The Topics and Thematic Areas of Expertise in Need for Capacity Building or of Interest
5. Discussion
5.1. Tasks and Target Subjects Involved in Role Positioning of EE Regional Centers
5.2. Expertise Development of Operation Teams of EE Regional Centers
Much of the leadership in post-secondary environmental education has come from people who are not educators, but are instead employed as specialists in one or another academic discipline.… Practically nowhere is it their primary responsibility. Nor is education their primary expertise.[59] (p. 7)
6. Conclusions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Questionnaire for the Operation Team Members of EE Regional Center
- The role positioning of EE regional center
- 1-1.
- Based on the status quo of EE in Taiwan, what do you think are the percentages of importance for the five major tasks, respectively, in the total tasks of an EE regional center? (Fill in each of the blanks with a number)
- (1)
- Academy leadership: ___%
- (2)
- Capacity building: ___%
- (3)
- Technological support: ___%
- (4)
- Research and evaluation: ___%
- (5)
- Dissemination partnerships: ___%
- 1-2.
- On a spectrum of roles with two ends, “practice-oriented” and “strategy-oriented,” which are defined as*:
- A practice-oriented EE regional center places emphasis on the ideal of popularization of EE and realizing actions in EE, specifies more types of organizations and populations as major targets, and provides proactive and direct services or programs/initiatives to these targets, although requiring more manpower, budget, and other resources.
- A strategy-oriented EE regional center underscores the ideas, methods, and system operations of EE and specifies fewer types of organizations and populations as major targets to provide them with proactive and direct services (guidance/capacity building). It passively accepts inquiries from, participates in or provides indirect services to other types of organizations and populations on demand, so might require less resources.
Which end do you think the EE regional centers should be positioned toward (without considering the limitations of budget, manpower, and other resources)?Practice-oriented ← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 → Strategy-oriented - 1-3.
- According to your view on the above positioning of the role of an EE regional center, please select from the following categories of subjects that the center should reach proactively and directly. (More than one category can be selected).☐ Corporate ☐ Schools ☐ NGOs ☐ EE personnel ☐ General public☐ Others: _________
- 1-4.
- Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following reasons for the subjects to be reached by EE regional centers.
Reasons Strongly disagree Strongly agree - 1.
- An EE regional center is supposed to proactively and directly provide programs and services to various subjects as best it can.
1 2 3 4 5 - 2.
- As schools at all levels are numerous, they should be provided with services by the organizations in the system of The Ministry of Education. The EE regional centers and those organizations should work for EE in cooperation with a division of labor.
1 2 3 4 5 - 3.
- The role position of EE regional centers would not be different from that of the numerous EE facilities/venues if they invested more effort and resources in providing EE proactively and directly to the general public.
1 2 3 4 5 - 4.
- Having substantial practical experiences in proactively and directly providing programs and services to the general public and schools is a prerequisite for the expertise of an EE regional center.
1 2 3 4 5 - 5.
- The EE institutions are statutory institutions for EE personnel training; the function of EE regional centers would overlap that of EE institutions if EE regional centers proactively and directly provided capacity building/training programs.
1 2 3 4 5 - 6.
- Seeking corporate groups to invest resources or participate in the promotion of EE is one of the important and major jobs of EE regional centers.
1 2 3 4 5 - 7.
- Corporate groups are profit-oriented so one should refrain from too many proactive and direct interactions with corporations in promoting educational work.
1 2 3 4 5 - 8.
- NGOs are important promoters in non-formal EE so the EE regional centers should proactively work with them.
1 2 3 4 5 - 9.
- The issues about which NGOs are concerned involve controversies of environmental policies and are hence not compatible with the educational nature of EE regional centers. They are not in the categories of organizations that must be reached.
1 2 3 4 5 Other reasons: ______________________________________ - 1-5.
- “Fostering the industrialization of EE in the region is one of the major tasks in which future EE regional centers should place their efforts”.Strongly disagree ← 1 2 3 4 5 → Strongly agree
- 1-6.
- As far as the legal status of EE regional centers, you consider that they should☐ Remain to be established by the Taiwan EPA projects☐ Be prescribed in the EE ActOther: ______________________________________
- Evaluation on the performances of EE region centers
- 2-1.
- Please rate each center on its overall performance in the task of “Academy leadership”.
Centers Low High Northern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Eastern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Southern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Central EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 2-2.
- Please rate each center on its overall performance in the task of “Capacity building”.
Centers Low High Northern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Eastern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Southern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Central EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 2-3.
- Please rate each center on its overall performance in the task of “Technological support”.
Centers Low High Northern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Eastern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Southern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Central EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 2-4.
- Please rate each center on its overall performance in the task of “Research and evaluation”.
Centers Low High Northern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Eastern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Southern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Central EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 2-5.
- Please rate each center on its overall performance in the task of “Dissemination partnerships”.
Centers Low High Northern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Eastern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Southern EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Central EE regional center 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
- Demographics
- 3-1.
- Age: _____; Gender: ☐ Male ☐ Female; Education: ______
- 3-2.
- Number of year(s) since you obtained a certificate of EE personnel☐ Not a holder of the certificate ☐ It has been ___ years
- 3-3.
- Position in the operation team: ☐ Project host/coordinator/manager ☐ Project Assistant☐ Other: _____
Appendix B. Questionnaire for the Members (Practitioners/Educators) of EE Institutions and Facilities/Venues
- 0.
- Please indicate the region you have been living in:☐ Northern ☐ Eastern ☐ Southern ☐ Central
- 1.
- Evaluation on the performances of the EE region center in your regionBased on your experiences in working with the center or participating in its activities, please rate the overall performances in each of the tasks for the center:
Centers Low High Academy leadership: absorbing international advances that then go through domestic conversions to develop expert EE strategies. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Capacity building: increasing the professional competencies, attitude, and techniques of environmental educators to make them models. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Technological support: developing technology-aided teaching methods that respond to environmental changes and technology advances. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Research and evaluation: devising operation systems for EE institutions, mechanisms of market needs for EE personnel, integrated management tools and performance evaluation systems for EE regional centers. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dissemination partnerships: networking with local partners and forming social communities on EE to promote regional EE. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 2.
- The topics in need for capacity building or of interest. (More than one topic can be selected).☐ Programming and activity/curriculum design ☐ Teaching/guiding skills☐ Facility/venue operation and management ☐ Campaign and marketing of activities☐ Application for facility/venue certification ☐ Others: __________
- 3.
- The thematic areas of expertise in need for capacity building or of interest. (More than one topic can be selected).☐ School and social EE ☐ Climate change ☐ Disaster prevention and rescue☐ Nature conservation ☐ Nuisance control ☐ Environmental/resource management☐ Cultural preservation ☐ Community participation
- 4.
- Demographics
- 4-1.
- Age: _____; Gender: ☐ Male ☐ Female; Education: ______
- 4-2.
- Number of year(s) since you obtained a certificate of EE personnel☐ Not a holder of the certificate ☐ It has been ___ years
- 4-3.
- Position in the institutions/facilities/venues: ☐ Senior manager ☐ Middle manager☐ Administration staff ☐ EE teachers
References
- Chou, J.; Lin, M.-R. A Planning Research on Local Environmental Learning Centers: An Example of Taichung Metropolis; Report of Commissioned Research Project, No. 88000057; Ministry of Education: Taipei, Taiwan, 2000.
- Liang, S.-W.; Hsu, J.-C. Adult’s Environmental Literacy Survey Project; Report of Commissioned Project, No. EPA-102-EA03-03-A260; Environmental Protection Administration, Executive Yuan: Taipei, Taiwan, 2013.
- Mochizuki, Y.; Fadeeva, Z. Regional centres of expertise on education for sustainable development (RCEs): An overview. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2008, 9, 369–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Internet Archive. 2017. Available online: https://web.archive.org/web/20170705061429/http://www.eecapacity.net/activities (accessed on 5 July 2017).
- Environmental Protection Administration (EPA). An Instruction to Bidders about the Review and Selection of the Commissioned Case on “Project Work Plan of Establishing the Northern Environmental Education Regional Center”; EPA, Executive Yuan: Taipei, Taiwan, 2014.
- Yanniris, C. 20+ years of environmental education centers in Greece: Teachers’ perceptions and future challenges. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2015, 14, 149–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Donoghue, R.; Fadeeva, Z. Enhancing monitoring and evaluation practices in RCEs. In Building A Resilient Future Through Multistakeholder Learning and Action: Ten Years of Regional Centres of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development; Fadeeva, Z., Payyappallimana, U., Tabucanon, M., Chhokar, K.B., Eds.; United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability: Tokyo, Japan, 2014; pp. 161–179. [Google Scholar]
- Medir, R.M.; Heras, R.; Geli, A.M. Guiding documents for environmental education centres: An analysis in the Spanish context. Environ. Educ. Res. 2014, 20, 680–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, C.W.; Li, C.; Liu, S.T. Service effectiveness of the nature centers for sustainability of environmental education and forest policy implications. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cha, S.C.; Jung, G.I.; Lee, K.M.; Oh, C.G.; Chang, Y.-H.; Lee, S.W. A study on functions of the environmental education centers in accordance with hierarchy. Environ. Educ. 2016, 29, 233–250. [Google Scholar]
- Browning, M.; Stern, M.; Ardoin, N.M.; Heimlich, J.E. Factors that contribute to community members’ support of local nature centers. Environ. Educ. Res. 2016, 24, 326–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Browning, M.; Stern, M.; Ardoin, N.M.; Heimlich, J.E.; Petty, R.; Charles, C. Investigating the sets of values that community members hold toward local nature centers. Environ. Educ. Res. 2016, 23, 1291–1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pitoska, E.; Lazarides, T. Environmental education centers and local communities: A case study. Procedia Technol. 2013, 8, 215–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ballantyne, R.; Packer, J. Promoting learning for sustainability: Principals’ perceptions of the role of outdoor and environmental education centres. Aust. J. Environ. Educ. 2006, 22, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Erickson, E.; Erickson, J. Lessons learned from environmental education center directors. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2006, 5, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simmons, D.A. Are we meeting the goal of responsible environmental behavior? An examination of nature and environmental education center goals. J. Environ. Educ. 1991, 22, 16–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, T.; Martin, J. Centers for Environmental Education: Guidelines for Success. In ERIC Database ED350145; Western Kentucky University: Bowling Green, OH, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, T.L. The TVA Network of Centers for Environmental Education: An Examination of Factors That Contribute to Success. Ph.D. Thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Padalino, J.J. National and regional centers for EE: Following up on the recommendations of the first national congress for environmental education futures—Policies and practices. In International Perspectives on Environmental Education: Issues and Actions. Selected Papers from the Thirteenth Annual Conference of the North American Association for Environmental Education; Cox, D.A., Stapp, W.B., Eds.; North American Association for Environmental Education: Troy, NY, USA, 1986; pp. 152–156. [Google Scholar]
- Viloria, L.A. A network of regional centres of environmental education and training: A strategy for developing countries. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 1991, 23, 633–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meichtry, Y.; Harrell, L. An environmental education needs assessment of K-12 teachers in Kentucky. J. Environ. Educ. 2002, 33, 21–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nomura, K.; Hendarti, L.; Abe, O. NGO environmental education centers in developing countries: Role, significance and keys to success, from a “change agent” perspective. Int. Rev. Environ. Strateg. 2003, 4, 165–182. [Google Scholar]
- Chao, Y.-L.; Kim, H.K.; Kim, C.K. A comparison of the regional environmental education centers in Korea and Taiwan: Systems, roles, and practices. J. Environ. Educ. Res. 2018, 14, 127–158. [Google Scholar]
- Liang, M.H. Research on a University as an Environmental Education Regional Center Involved in the Implementation of Environmental Education with Local Government; Final Report; Research Project of the Ministry of Science and Techonology: Taipei, Taiwan, 2015.
- Hsu, M.-Y.; Tang, Y.-J. Exploring the collaboration relationships with partner organizations of environmental education regional centers of the environmental protection administration. New Horiz. Bimonth. Teach. Taipei 2017, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Chiang, P.-Y. The Evaluation of Central Environmental Education Regional Center’s Operating Mechanisms and Effectiveness. Master’s Thesis, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung, Taiwan, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Minnesota Environmental Education Advisory Board. A GreenPrint for Minnesota: State Plan for Environmental Education; Office of Environmental Education, Minnesota Department of Education: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1993.
- Smaldone, D.; Dey, S.E. Developing a successful state-level environmental education organization: A nationwide assessment. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2010, 9, 159–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fadeeva, Z.; Mochizuki, Y. Roles of regional centres of expertise on education for sustainable development: Lessons learnt in the first half of the UNDESD. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 4, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Judy, J.M. Centers for Environmental Education: The Tennessee Valley Authority Model. In Case Studies in Environmental Education; Tennessee Valley Authority: Knoxville, TN, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Center for Environmental Education. 2020. Available online: https://nku.edu/academics/coe/centers/enved.html (accessed on 15 February 2020).
- Murga-Menoyo, M.A. Educating for local development and global sustainability: An overview in Spain. Sustainability 2009, 1, 479–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Romi, S.; Schmida, M. Non-formal education: A major educational force in the postmodern era. Camb. J. Educ. 2009, 39, 257–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO. United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD, 2005–2014). Review of Contexts and Structures for Education for Sustainable Development; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed.; The Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. A/70/L.1. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In Proceedings of the Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, Paris, France, 24 September 2015. Available online: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2020).
- Stephens, J.C.; Hernandez, M.E.; Román, M.; Graham, A.C.; Scholz, R.W. Higher education as a change agent for sustainability in different cultures and contexts. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2008, 9, 317–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mcmillin, J.; Dyball, R. Developing a whole-of-university approach to educating for sustainability. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 3, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Havea, P.H.; Mohanty, M. Professional development and sustainable development goals. In Quality Education. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals; Leal Filho, W., Azul, A., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P., Wall, T., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Činčera, J.; Kulich, J.; Gollová, D. Effectiveness, evaluation and support for environmental education programmes. Envigogika 2009, 4, 1–31. [Google Scholar]
- Mader, C. Sustainability process assessment on transformative potentials: The Graz model for integrative development. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 49, 54–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dlouhá, J.; Barton, A.; Janoušková, S.; Dlouhý, J. Social learning indicators in sustainability-oriented regional learning networks. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 49, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schulze, S. Evaluation of environmental education centres: A research design for the case study method. S. Afr. J. Environ. Educ. 1992, 12, 21–31. [Google Scholar]
- Aipanjiguly, S.; Mochizuki, Y.; Fadeeva, Z. Emerging communities of practice: Regional centres of expertise discuss themes and evaluations. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2008, 2, 17–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Day, R.W.; Quinn, G.P. Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 1989, 59, 433–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabir, M. The Role of Universities in Sustainable Development with Special Focus on Pakistan; University Malaysia Perlis (UNIMAP): Kangar, Malaysia, 2008; pp. 60–68. [Google Scholar]
- Peer, V.; Stoeglehner, G. Universities as change agents for sustainability—Framing the role of knowledge transfer and generation in regional development processes. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 44, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cortese, A.D. The critical role of higher education in creating a sustainable future. Plan. High. Educ. 2003, 31, 15–22. [Google Scholar]
- Reddy, C.; Schreuder, D. Environmental education scholarship in a ‘marketised’ setting: A case study in a university environmental education programme. Environ. Educ. Res. 2004, 10, 297–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shephard, K.; Furnari, M. Exploring what university teachers think about education for sustainability. Stud. High. Educ. 2013, 38, 1577–1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanowski, P.; Yao, D.; Wyatt, S. SDG 4: Quality education and forests—‘The golden thread’. In Sustainable Development Goals: Their Impacts on Forests and People; Katila, P., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2020; pp. 108–145. [Google Scholar]
- Jones, L.; Moore, R. Education, competence and the control of expertise. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 1993, 14, 385–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Church, A.H. Do you see what I see? An exploration of congruence in ratings from multiple perspectives. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1997, 27, 983–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yammarino, F.J.; Atwater, L.E. Understanding self-perception accuracy: Implications for human resource management. Hum. Resour. Manag. 1993, 32, 231–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van der Heijden, B.I.J.M.; Nijhof, A.H.J. The value of subjectivity: Problems and prospects for 360-degree appraisal systems. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2004, 15, 493–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lance, C.E.; Baxter, D.; Mahan, R.P. Multi-source performance measurement: A reconceptualization. In Performance Measurement: Current Perspectives and Future Challenges; Bennett, W., Lance, C.E., Woehr, D.J., Eds.; Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2006; pp. 49–76. [Google Scholar]
- Folkes, V.S. How consumers predict service quality: What do they expect? In The Service Quality Handbook; Scheuing, E.E.E., Christopher, W.F., Eds.; American Management Association: New York, NY, USA, 1993; pp. 108–123. [Google Scholar]
- Hoffman, R.R.; Shadbolt, N.; Burton, A.M.; Klein, G.A. Eliciting knowledge from experts: A methodological analysis. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1995, 62, 129–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hungerford, H. Environmental educators: A conversation with John Disinger. J. Environ. Educ. 2002, 33, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mieg, H.A. The Social Psychology of Expertise: Case Studies in Research, Professional Domains, and Expert Roles; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Disinger, J.F.; Roth, C.E. Environmental Literacy; ERIC Digest 351201; Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education: Columbus, OH, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Van de Wiel, M.W.J.; Szegedi, K.H.P.; Weggeman, M.C.D.P. Professional learning: Deliberate attempts at developing expertise. In Professional Learning: Gaps and Transitions on the Way from Novice to Expert; Boshuizen, H.P.A., Bromme, R., Gruber, H., Eds.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004; pp. 181–206. [Google Scholar]
- Vare, P.; Arro, G.; De Hamer, A.; Del Gobbo, G.; de Vries, G.; Farioli, F.; Kadji-Beltran, C.; Kangur, M.; Mayer, M.; Nijdam, C.; et al. Devising a competence-based training program for educators of sustainable development: Lessons learned. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lave, J.; Wenger, E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, D.H.L.; Shaari, I. Professional identity or best practices?—An exploration of the synergies between professional learning communities and communities of practices. Creat. Educ. 2012, 3, 457–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, Y.; Krasny, M.E. Practice change in environmental education: Lessons from professional development. Environ. Educ. Res. 2019, 25, 1119–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khelghat-Doost, H.; Sanusi, Z.A.; Tunku Fariddudin, T.F.F.D.; Jegatesen, G. Institutions of higher education and partnerships in education for sustainable development: Case study of the Regional Center of Expertise (RCE) Penang, Malaysia. J. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 4, 108–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO; UNDP; UNPFA; UNHCR; UNICEF; UN Women. Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4. 2016. Available online: http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/education-2030-incheon-framework-foraction-implementation-of-sdg4-2016-en_2.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2020).
- Thomson, P. Uniting to Put Education at Heart of Sustainable Development. 2017. Available online: www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/uniting_to_put_education_at_heart_of_sustainable_development/ (accessed on 10 March 2020).
- Rieckmann, M. Learning to transform the world: Key competencies in education for sustainable development. In Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2018; pp. 39–59. [Google Scholar]
- Kopnina, H. Teaching Sustainable Development Goals in the Netherlands: A critical approach. Environ. Educ. Res. 2017, 24, 1268–1283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walter, A.I.; Helgenberger, S.; Wiek, A.; Roland, W. Measuring societal effects of transdisciplinary research projects: Design and application of an evaluation method. Eval. Program Plan. 2007, 30, 325–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, J.S.; Collins, A.; Duguid, P. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educ. Res. 1989, 18, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lave, J.; Wenger, E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, J.S.; Duguid, P. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organ. Sci. 1991, 2, 40–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collins, A.; Brown, J.S.; Holum, A. Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. Am. Educ. 1991, 15, 6–11. [Google Scholar]
- Herrington, J.; Oliver, R. An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2000, 48, 23–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hesselink, F.; van Kempen, P.P.; Wals, A.E.J. ESDebate International Debate on Education for Sustainable Development; International Union for the Conservation of Nature: Gland, Switzerland, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Schnack, K. Participation, education and democracy: Implications for environmental education, health education, and education for sustainable development. In Participation and Learning: Developing Perspectives on Education and the Environment, Health and Sustainability; Reid, A., Nikel, J., Jensen, B.B., Simovska, V., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 181–196. [Google Scholar]
- Bardauskiene, D. The expert’s estimates application in the preparation of city general plan. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 2007, 13, 223–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kopar, C. The Characteristics of Effective Environmental Education Programs: An Exploration of the Perceptions of Environmental Educators in Southern Ontario. Master’s Thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Zint, M.T.; Dowd, P.F.; Covitt, B.A. Enhancing environmental educators’ evaluation competencies: Insights from an examination of the effectiveness of the My Environmental Education Evaluation Resource Assistant (MEERA) website. Environ. Educ. Res. 2011, 17, 471–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jickling, B.; Wals, A.E.J. Debating education for sustainable development 20 years after Rio: A conversation between Bob Jickling and Arjen Wals. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 6, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Group | Organization | Sum | Number of Respondents as Evaluators in the Evaluation on Each EE Regional Center | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Northern Center | Central Center | Southern Center | Eastern Center | |||
1 | EE facilities/venues | 78 | 18 | 28 | 20 | 12 |
EE institutions | 22 | 6 | 3 | 11 | 2 | |
2 | EE regional center operation teams | 18 | – |
Demographics | Members of the Four EE Regional Center Operation Teams (N = 18) | Members of EE Facilities, Venues, and Institutions (N = 100) |
---|---|---|
Age | Mean = 37.6, SD = 9.5 | Mean = 37.6, SD = 10.0 |
Gender | Female: 38.9% Male: 61.1% | Female: 52.0% Male: 48.0% |
Education | Master: 38.9% Doctorate: 61.1% | Under bachelor: 8.0% Bachelor: 34.0% Master: 49.0% Doctorate: 9.0% |
Position | Project hosts/coordinators/managers: 44.4% Assistants: 55.6% | Senior managers: 11.0% Middle managers: 31.0% Administration staff: 42.0% EE teachers: 10% |
EE personnel certification | No certification: 38.9% Certified: 61.1% (3–5 years) | No certification: 23.0% Certified: 57.0% (1–3 years) 20.0% (3–5 years) |
Task | Mean (%) | Standard Deviation (%) |
---|---|---|
Academy leadership | 20.01 | 6.25 |
Capacity building | 22.21 | 3.61 |
Technological support | 16.84 | 4.84 |
Research and evaluation | 17.34 | 7.54 |
Dissemination partnerships | 23.60 | 5.43 |
Reasons | Mean | Standard Deviation |
---|---|---|
An EE regional center is supposed to proactively and directly provide programs and services to various subjects as best it can. | 4.06 | 0.73 |
As schools at all levels are numerous, they should be provided with services by the organizations in the system of Ministry of Education. The EE regional centers and those organizations should work for EE in cooperation with a division of labor. | 4.11 | 0.76 |
The role position of EE regional centers would not be different from that of the numerous EE facilities/venues if they invested more effort and resources in providing EE proactively and directly to the general public. | 3.94 | 1.11 |
Having substantial practical experiences in proactively and directly providing programs and services to the general public and schools is a prerequisite for the expertise of an EE regional center. | 3.72 | 1.02 |
The EE institutions are statutory institutions for EE personnel training; the function of EE regional centers would overlap that of EE institutions if EE regional centers proactively and directly provided capacity building/training programs. | 3.61 | 1.24 |
Seeking corporate groups to invest resources or participate in the promotion of EE is one of the important and major jobs of EE regional centers. | 3.72 | 1.07 |
Corporate groups are profit-oriented so one should refrain from too many proactive and direct interactions with corporations in promoting educational work. | 2.17 | 1.15 |
NGOs are important promoters in non-formal EE so the EE regional centers should proactively work with them. | 4.33 | 0.77 |
The issues about which NGOs are concerned involve controversies of environmental policies and are hence not compatible with the educational nature of EE regional centers. They are not in the categories of organizations that must be reached. | 2.44 | 1.42 |
EE Regional Centers | Rated by Members of EE Regional Center Operation Teams (X) | Rated by Members of EE Institutions and Facilities/Venues (Y) | Differences of Means (X-Y) | Rated by All Respondents |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 41.28 (5.33) | 36.13 a (5.46) | 5.15** | 38.33 b (5.93) |
B | 38.17 (5.60) | 35.03 (9.33) | 3.13 | 36.18 (8.24) |
C | 39.28 (5.74) | 27.61 a (13.02) | 11.66** | 31.90 b (12.24) |
D | 37.72 (6.21) | 36.07 (8.55) | 1.65 | 37.00 (7.25) |
Centers/Tasks | Mean Scores Rated by Members of EE Regional Center Operation Teams (Group I) | Mean Scores Rated by Members of EE Institutions, Facilities, and Venues (Group II) | Differences in Means (Group I–Group II) | Mean Scores Rated by All Respondents of Both Groups | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EE regional centers | A | B | C | D | A | B | C | D | A | B | C | D | A | B | C | D |
Academy leadership | 8.72 (1.23) | 7.67 (1.24) | 7.61 (1.33) | 7.50 (1.42) | 7.21 (1.38) | 6.84 (2.07) | 5.32 (2.76) | 6.86 (2.18) | 1.51 ** | 0.83 | 2.29 *** | 0.64 | 7.86 (1.51) | 7.14 (1.84) | 6.16 (2.58) | 7.22 (1.79) |
Capacity building | 8.56 (1.04) | 7.67 (1.03) | 8.06 (1.16) | 7.78 (1.00) | 7.75 (1.26) | 7.26 (2.00) | 5.81 (2.86) | 7.79 (1.31) | 0.81 * | 0.41 | 2.25 *** | −0.01 | 8.10 (1.23) | 7.41 (1.71) | 6.63 (2.60) | 7.78 (1.13) |
Technological support | 7.56 (1.89) | 7.00 (2.03) | 7.61 (2.25) | 6.89 (2.08) | 6.71 (1.43) | 6.77 (1.91) | 5.52 (2.69) | 6.64 (2.06) | 0.85 | 0.23 | 2.09 ** | 0.25 | 7.07 (1.67) | 6.86 (1.94) | 6.29 (2.72) | 6.78 (2.04) |
Research and evaluation | 7.67 (1.85) | 7.56 (1.82) | 7.44 (1.85) | 7.28 (1.93) | 7.00 (1.22) | 6.90 (2.06) | 5.32 (2.45) | 7.14 (1.92) | 0.67 | 0.66 | 2.12 ** | 0.14 | 7.29 (1.53) | 7.14 (1.98) | 6.10 (2.46) | 7.22 (1.90) |
Dissemination partnerships | 8.78 (0.94) | 8.28 (0.96) | 8.56 (0.86) | 8.28 (1.27) | 7.46 (1.28) | 7.26 (1.98) | 5.65 (2.76) | 7.64 (1.91) | 1.32 ** | 1.02 * | 2.91 *** | 0.64 | 8.02 (1.32) | 7.63 (1.74) | 6.71 (2.65) | 8.00 (1.59) |
Academy leadership (comments for each center): | |
A |
|
B |
|
C |
|
Capacity building (comments for each center): | |
B |
|
C |
|
Technological support (comments for each center): | |
B |
|
D |
|
Research and evaluation (comments for each center): | |
B |
|
Dissemination partnerships (comments for each center): | |
B |
|
C |
|
D |
|
Topics | Picks | % |
---|---|---|
Programming and activity/curriculum design | 56 | 28.28 |
Teaching/guiding skills | 47 | 23.74 |
Facility/venue operation and management | 41 | 20.71 |
Campaign and marketing of activities | 42 | 21.21 |
Application for facility/venue certification | 12 | 6.06 |
Areas | Counts | % |
---|---|---|
School and social EE | 34 | 12.73 |
Climate change | 34 | 12.73 |
Disaster prevention and rescue | 17 | 6.37 |
Nature conservation | 49 | 18.35 |
Nuisance control | 19 | 7.12 |
Environmental/resource management | 41 | 15.36 |
Cultural preservation | 41 | 15.36 |
Community participation | 32 | 11.99 |
© 2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chao, Y.-L. A Performance Evaluation of Environmental Education Regional Centers: Positioning of Roles and Reflections on Expertise Development. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2501. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062501
Chao Y-L. A Performance Evaluation of Environmental Education Regional Centers: Positioning of Roles and Reflections on Expertise Development. Sustainability. 2020; 12(6):2501. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062501
Chicago/Turabian StyleChao, Yu-Long. 2020. "A Performance Evaluation of Environmental Education Regional Centers: Positioning of Roles and Reflections on Expertise Development" Sustainability 12, no. 6: 2501. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062501