Quantifying a Relationship Between Place-based Learning and Environmental Quality

Photo: Fabio Marini

Aim: Review the evidence for a direct connection between place-based learning and environmental quality.

Project Partners:• National Park Service Conservation Study Institute• Center for Place-based Learning & Community Engagement• Shelburne Farms• Adopt-A-Watershed• PEER Associates• Antioch University New England• Massachusetts General Hospital

Funding: EPA’s Office of Environmental Education

Citation for complete report (available at www.PEECworks.org):Duffin, M., Murphy, M., & Johnson, B. (2008). Quantifying a relationship

between place-based learning and environmental quality: Final report. Woodstock, VT: NPS Conservation Study Institute in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency and Shelburne Farms.

Background

Photo: Mack Wong

Methods•Focused “environmental quality” to “air quality”

•Research design symposium

•Literature review

•Air quality education program identified

•Evaluation of existing data led to creation of new survey

•45-minute interviews with 54 air quality education programs

•Quantitative analysis of survey data

Photo: Jeffery Simpson

The “universe”: Interventions to improve EQ (As a benchmark, the EPA FY2008 budget = $7.8 billion)

Education interventions to improve EQ (As a benchmark, the EPA Office of Environmental Ed.

FY2008 budget = $9 million.)

Education interventions that address air quality: Our study population

About 200 AQ education programs and teachers identified, though likely that

thousands of teachers incorporate AQ.

Who We Studied

Our study sample We interviewed staff from 54 programs, representing

more than 50,000 students from more than 800 schools. Demographic tendencies toward teacher-

initiated programs, working with lower-income, older, white students in urban areas.

Photo: Skyseeker

Key Finding #1Nearly half of the education

programs studied reported evidence of improvements in air quality.

Photo:Skyseeker

46% of the programs in our sample reported improvements in physical or proxy air quality indicators.

Measured ChangeProgram displays evidence of physical or proxy AQ indicator

improvement outcomes.

n of programs in sample = 25

n of programs with physical AQ improvement = 6 n of programs with proxy AQ improvement = 19

Example (physical AQ improvement): East Valley (WA) Middle SchoolStudents monitored school IAQ and worked with administrators to implement structural changes resulting in improved CO2, air flow, particulate levels, odors, and mold.

Example (proxy AQ improvement): Exeter (MA) High SchoolStudents studied AQ issues and monitored car pooling and idling in school parking lot. Program resulted in a no-idling policy and the installation of no-idling signs.

There were three types of programs in

our sample: Those that provided

information only, those that took some

kind of action, and those that measured changes before and

after an action.

Measured Change

46%Action Taken43%

InfoOnly11%

Example: North Carolina DNR

Outreach presentations at schools and churches about the effects of poor air quality and things individuals can do to help improve AQ.

Example: Rose Foundation

High-school students monitored AQ near their school and then contacted officials, wrote letters to polluting industries, and participated in press conferences.

Information OnlyProgram provided education and/or information

about AQ, but displays no evidence of AQ improvement outcomes; AQ was not assessed;

no actions known to be taken.n of programs in sample = 6

Action TakenProgram displays no evidence of AQ

improvement outcomes, but assessed AQ/related behaviors and/or took action to

promote AQ improvement.n of programs in sample = 23

Photo: Mack Wong

Photo:Skyseeker

Key Finding #2Most of the programs studied took some form of action to promote

air quality improvement.

PBL-EQ Theory of ChangePBL or other education

intervention

Classroom teachingNonprofit education program

Community educationPublic awareness campaign

Environmental quality measurement or assessment

Indoor air quality assessmentLocal outdoor AQ assessment

Behavior monitoring (e.g. car or bus idling, car pooling)

Action based on findings

Policy proposal to governing bodyEducation or awareness campaign

AdvocacySpecific remedial actions recommended

Change in proxy indicators

Anti-idling policy enactedIndividual behavior changes

Further study undertakenNew institutional practices (e.g. cleaning

products or procedures)

Documented environmentalquality improvement

Improvements in physical air quality(e.g. carbon dioxide, particulates,

relative humidity)

Photo: Christian Guthier

Photo:Skyseeker

Key Finding #3Programs reporting more

place-based learning practices also showed more evidence of improved

air quality (r = .40, p < .01).

AQ education programs in our sample embodied many qualities of place-based learning. Two-thirds self-rated

“strong” on four of six PBL core qualities.

PBL Characteristics% of programs reporting

quality as strong

Personally relevant to learners 89%

Experiential or hands-on 85%

Promoted understanding on a larger scale 85%

Used the local environment as a context for learning 80%

Students worked individually and in groups 76%

Project-based 74%

Supported by school/organization leadership 74%

Contributed to authentic community needs 72%

Content was interdisciplinary 67%

Tailored to individual learning styles 56%

Promoted attachment to local place and/or community 54%

Included a service-learning component 46%

Included structured reflection by students on their learning 39%

Utilized existing or created new local partnerships 35%

Fostered collaboration with local community 33%

Driven or led by students 32%

Supported by local community 30%

Initiated by students 11%Photo: Ivar

The degree to which a program incorporated PBL was the strongest

predictor of AQ improvement outcomes.

Any proxy or physical AQ

indicators improved

(Pearson correlation r)

Total score for all PBL qualities and practices .40**

Total score for core PBL qualities only .38**

Funding .24t

Instructional dose .19t

** significant at .01 level (2-tailed) t significant at .10 level (2-tailed)

Photo: Mack Wong

Service-learning and community involvement were the most significant PBL qualities that

predicted AQ improvement outcomes.

PBL CharacteristicsImprovement in physical or proxy AQ indicators

(Pearson r)

Included a service-learning component .38**

Contributed to authentic community needs .33*

Supported by school/organization leadership .30*

Utilized existing or created new local partnerships .30*

Supported by local community .29*

Experiential or hands-on .28*Driven or led by students .23

Project-based .22

Fostered collaboration with local community .21

Students worked individually and in groups .18

Promoted understanding on a larger scale .18

Content was interdisciplinary .18

Initiated by students .12

Promoted attachment to local place and/or community .10

Included structured reflection by students on their learning .10

Personally relevant to learners .09

Used the local environment as a context for learning -.04

Tailored to individual learning styles -.16** significant at .01 level (1-tailed) * significant at .05 level (1-tailed) Photo: Jeffery Simpson

Proxy indicators may be a critical ingredient in understanding

the PBL-EQ relationship.

Total score for all PBL qualities and

practices

Total score for core PBL qualities only

Any physical AQ indicators improved .20 .13

Any proxy AQ indicators improved .29* .31*

Any physical or proxy AQ indicators improved .40** .38**

Any action to improve AQ .30* .18

Any physical or proxy AQ indicators improved, or any action taken

.30* .18

** significant at .01 level (2-tailed) * significant at .05 level (2-tailed)

Photo: Christian Guthier

Limitations and Areas for Future Study

Limitation Areas for Future Study

It is unclear how representative our sample is of both air quality programs and programs that

address EQ in general.

Replicate using larger, stratified, random sampling.

Replicate focusing on a different EQ topic (e.g. climate change).

Replicate with experimental or quasi-experimental designs.

Rudimentary measures of specific PBL qualities and practices.

Case study research to provide richer descriptions of best practices.

Further research to clarify terminology.

Potential tautology between outcome categories and methods of PBL.

Further research to investigate the impacts of PBL vs. other educational approaches.

Physical air quality improvement outcomes are difficult to measure because they are multiply

determined, long term, and large scale.

Further investigation of the role of proxy indicators in understanding EQ outcomes of

education programs.

Scale of impact, perhaps incorporating Short’s EEPI tool.

Photo: Mack Wong

• Financial support for conservation projects that actively attempt to improve EQ primarily through education programs.

• May provide a good return on investment.

• Policy support for education that addresses EQ would likely help to advance the discussion of EQ outcomes and impacts within the EE community.

• Further investment is warranted for research that refines our understanding of the EE-EQ relationship.

Implications for Policymakers

Photo: Jeffery Simpson

• Consider adding measurement and assessment components to EQ-related programs.

• Less concern about what to call a program, and more focus on including specific educational practices that engage participants in their local communities by investigating and measuring real-world EQ issues.

Implications for Educators

Photo: Christian Guthier

• Education programs are demonstrating measurable improvements in AQ.

• Use of place-based education practice was the strongest predictor of AQ improvement.

• Service-learning and active community connections were the specific PBL qualities with the strongest correlations to AQ improvement.

• It is possible to quantify a relationship between education and environmental quality in a way that helps us understand best practices.

Summary

Photo: Ivar