From Attitudes to Action:Using Environmental Educational Curriculum to Influence Behavior

Jill Stein

Jill Stein 2

Introduction:

The fundamental purpose of education is a long-debated topic. Some believe

that education is the systematic process of shaping and/or changing behaviors to

reflect the values of the larger society. Environmental education, or conservation

education, often subscribes to this theory, aiming to “develop a world population

that…has the knowledge, skills, attitudes, motivations and commitment to work

individually and collectively towards solutions of current problems and prevention

of new ones” (UNESCO-UNEP 1976). Others believe that education is meant to

facilitate the growth of intellectual capacity in the learner, rather than impose a

certain lifestyle or set of behaviors. Those who view education in this lens see

environmental education as a way to diversify the setting in which learning takes

place, using the natural world to better understand humanity’s place within it.

Most programming for environmental education walks the line between

these two dichotomies, recognizing the inherent value that the outdoors can have on

learning as well as providing an agenda that looks to shape environmentally-

friendly attitudes and subsequent behaviors. Which skills provide the ability to

perform which favorable behaviors, though? The answer to this question varies

from scholar to scholar, organization to organization, culture to culture. The

importance of Environmental Education (EE) has become a topic of discussion

across the globe, encouraged by international organizations such as the United

Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United

Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). While universally adopted documents

ABSTRACTEnvironmental educators often overlook the importance of psychological frameworks concerning the linkages between attitudes and behavior. The fields of environmental and social psychology have rarely tested how pro-environmental behaviors can be formed in young children. This project proposal aims to blend the best of educational philosophy and psychological frameworks to create an eight-week curriculum and evaluation tool that gives participants the knowledge, skills, motivations, and tools for success to engage the entire community of Robin’s Bay, Jamaica in long-term pro-environmental initiatives.

Jill Stein 3

such as Agenda 21 refer to EE as a fundamental avenue in which to create

environmentally-friendly citizens, the sociocultural differences of nations calls for

EE curriculum that is specifically designed and administered to reflect the lived

experiences of its citizens. It has been shown children as young as kindergarten age

can begin to develop attitudes towards the environment, both on a general and a

specific scale (Byant & Hungerford, 1979). The investment in curriculum and

experiences for youth that promote environmental awareness is seen as a major

aspect of the sustainable development agenda. With growing knowledge of

children’s ability to meaningfully contribute to environmental causes, institutions of

education are seen as the best foundation in which to involve young people and

facilitate their participatory roles in society (Ansell 2006).

Environmental educational programs are most effective when the material

directly reflects the perspectives of the participants’ daily lives (Palmberg & Jari,

2000). The Jamaican perspective and relationship to their land is complex, a small

tropical island with limited resources on high demand. Their pristine beachfronts

and intentional marketing for over fifty years have made Jamaica an international

tourist destination, accounting for 9.1% of the GDP and 27.1% of employment

(World Travel and Trade Council, 2008). Jamaica is also the second largest bauxite

exporter in the world, second to only much larger Australia. Jamaica therefore relies

on its natural resources to maintain its current economic structure and continue to

make payments on the large World Bank and IMF debt it owes. Jamaican politicians

can proudly state payments to the international corporations have never been late,

but this punctuality has contributed to the types of commercial developments that

Jill Stein 4

have cost the Jamaican citizens access to many of the best lands on the island. This,

and the global trend of transitioning away from an agricultural economy to a service

based economy, has blunted the native sense of place and ties to the land that are

significantly important in shaping certain environmental attitudes and behaviors.

Environmental education has come to encompass human and peace

education as well as a platform to bring about economic and social justice, examples

of which has been seen in the 2004 and 2007 Nobel Peace Prize presentations by

environmental activists Wangari Maathai and Albert Gore, respectively (Locke,

2009). An eco-justice framework uses environmental education to give marginalized

populations a voice in democratic discussions surrounding global environmental

degradation (Bowers, 2001). Rather than ignore the reality that environmental

pollution and resource depletion is linked to social inequality and imbalances of

power, critically developed and intentional environmental education can provide a

platform for empowerment as well an opportunity to develop skills and behaviors

that positively effect the quality of life for a community.

The environmental attitudes of adults and their relationship to pro-

environmental behavior has been studied by numerous scholars and researchers,

but the environmental attitudes and behaviors of children have been looked at less

often. As their attitudes are just beginning to develop, and thus easier to shape, and

since their role in environmental causes will be significant in the future, this is a

pertinent demographic to study. The small town of Robin’s Bay, Jamaica, has

recently started a summer camp for its primary age children that focuses around

Jill Stein 5

environmental themes. This program offers the opportunity to test a multilayered

approach to how best design and structure effective environmental education

curriculum, as well as provide the chance to test (changing) environmental attitudes

and their relationship to behavior through consistent program evaluation methods.

Looking to theories of attitude and behavioral psychology can significantly inform

the substantive structure of environmental education in this case. Often

environmental education programming is based off of collective wisdom or good

intentions and pays little attention to the psychological mechanisms by which

communication and personal experience influence people’s cognitive processes

and/or behaviors (Gotch & Hall, 2004). The effectiveness of EE programs is

weakened through these theoretical oversights. Using researched and tested

theories such as Fishbein and Ajzen’s Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of

Planned Behavior, as well as the working knowledge of social learning theories, can

help make the Robin’s Bay camp an effective and useful tool for the citizens of the

community. It is hypothesized that the program will result in more informed and

positive attitudes toward the environment and pro-environmental behavioral

intentions, but that behavior itself will only be shifted if the community networks

and institutions also join in initiatives that offer the ways for citizens to participate

as a collective.

Literature Review:

Leeming and Dwyer formulated the Children’s Environmental Attitude and

Knowledge Scale (CHEAKS) by the careful adaptation of an adult scale by Maloney,

Jill Stein 6

Ward, and Braucht (1975) that was originally developed to measure ecological

attitudes and knowledge (Leeming & Dwyer, 1995). This scale was developed over

several years with careful and intentional construction, providing acceptable

assurance of reliability and validity (Leeming & Dwyer, 1995). The CHEAKS

instrument is divided into two sub-scales, attitudes and knowledge. The Attitude

subscale measures students’ attitudes towards the environment within six different

domains—animals, energy, pollution, recycling, water, and general issues. There are

12 verbal commitment questions, 12 questions measure actual commitment, and 12

assess affect (Leeming & Dwyer, 1995). The Knowledge subscale comprises 30

items that also fall within the six domains. The response options are presented in a

Likert-scale format, with the highest points given to the most pro-environmental

responses.

As Leeming and Dwyer developed the tool in an American context, using the

CHEAKS instrument in a cross-cultural setting such as Jamaica requires specific

changes to be made. CHEAKS has been used in both Irish and Turkish schools, in

both cases altering word choices and certain questions, and has still produced

reliable data that the instrument accurately measures both attitudes and knowledge

(Alp, Ertepinar, Tekkaya, & Yilmaz, 2008) (Walsh-Daneshmandi & MacLachlan,

2006). It appears that knowledge of environmental issues does not directly

correlate with attitudes, with results showing much more positive environmental

attitudes than depth of knowledge. This indicates that the affective component is a

powerful factor in influencing primary school age children’s environmentally

friendly behaviors (Alp, Ertepinar, Tekkaya, & Yilmaz, 2008). While this has direct

Jill Stein 7

implications on what kind of arguments can be integrated into EE curriculum, it is

important to remember that attitudes shaped affectively may equate more to

behavioral intention over actual behavior. This is why affective arguments must be

used in conjunction with tested learning models that provide the skills and support

to commit the desired behaviors.

Environmental Education has been on the Caribbean agenda since the early

1970s, as Small Developing Island States (SIDS) in the region stepped into the

international stage. Jamaica, specifically, has taken steps since the early 1970s to

integrate EE into youth development in both formal and informal measures

(Ferguson, 2008). Jamaica has actively adopted its own environmental agenda

towards a sustainable development model, and hosted a number of national and

regional conferences on the subject, such as a Caribbean meeting in 2005 titled

“Education for Sustainable Development: New Approaches for the Future” and a

teachers conferences in 2006 which examined how to re-orient teachers education

to include focuses on sustainable practices (Ferguson 2008).

In Jamaica, efforts have been made to integrate EE curriculum into all levels

of the nation’s formal education system. The National Environmental Education

Committee (NEEC) used a participatory process to create the National

Environmental Action Plan for Sustainable Development (NEEAPSD), which was

implemented from 1998-2010 (Ferguson, 2008). The plan envisions the country’s

environmental education initiatives stemming from five priorities within the

sustainable development discourse; teacher professional development, curriculum

Jill Stein 8

development and implementation, national public awareness, community learning

and resources and practices (National Environmental Education Committee, 1998).

Initial evaluations of the program have seen the most development in the area of

teaching professional development, with some teachers’ colleges implementing a

“whole school” approach to the EESD initiative with the Sustainable Teacher

Environmental Education Project implemented by the Joint Board of Teacher

Education (Ferguson, 2008). The NSSAPSD goal of curriculum development and

implementation has become part of the mission of the Jamaican Ministry of

Education, which hopes to infuse EE into all aspects of school life and curriculum.

Jamaica has launched numerous formal and informal programs within the school

setting and extra-curricular initiatives, such as the Schools Environment

Programme, led by local NGO Jamaica Environment Trust.

As numerous scholars and organizations state, environmental education

aims to produce environmentally literate citizens who have the necessary skills and

awareness to address challenges and take action, with pro-environmental behaviors

being the ultimate goal (UNESCO, 1980). Achieving this goal is difficult, though, as

environmental attitudes are reflected on cognitive, affective, and behavioral levels,

and are largely influenced through sociocultural norms, economic status, and

ability/perceived ability to act. EE curriculum must therefore be

phenomenologically constructed, and reflect objectives that appeal to all three

psychological constructs.

Jill Stein 9

Early studies of behavior within the field of psychology grew out of the

opposition to initial views that the discipline should only deal with internal mental

processes (Heimlich & Ardoin, 2008). Classical behaviorism was mainly concerned

with behaviors that could be seen. Only later did behaviorism come to include the

study of cognitive and affective behaviors that could not be seen. Educational

psychology values the study of both overt behaviors, which can be directly

observed, and covert behaviors, which are the private thoughts and emotions of an

individual. This pushes up against the classical stimulus-response notions that view

the mind, body, and broader environment as separate entities. Beginning in 1912

with James, another approach to behavior was proposed, which focused on the role

of experience, the connections among experiences, and the overall importance of

experience and personal perception as mediators between the elements of stimulus

and response (Heimlich & Ardoin, 2008). Dewey also backed the role of lived

experience, rejecting the dichotomies that separated mind and body. Dewey’s focus

on experience, and the role prior experiences have on future behaviors, largely

informed the discipline of social behaviorism which values the central connection of

attitudes to behavior (Garrison, 1995).

Several environmental psychologists have also theorized the influences on

behavior. Stern et al. developed a model linking values, beliefs, and environmental

norms to behaviors (Stern, Kalof, Dietz, & Guagnano, 1995). Hines developed a

similar model that uses personality, knowledge, and situational factors to explain

responsible environmental behavior (Hines A. , 1993). These models share the

fundamental framework that behavior comes from individual factors (such as

Jill Stein10

knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and values), social influences, and situational factors

that either constrain or enable an action (Gotch & Hall, 2004). Fishbein & Ajzen’s

Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) is founded on similar concepts, and has been

widely tested and shown to be a powerful tool for understanding and predicting

behavior. Specifically in the field of natural resource management and conservation,

the TRA has been successfully used to develop communication campaigns and

understand and predict when people will or will not participate in pro-

environmental behavior (Gotch & Hall, 2004). Therefore, using the Theory of

Reasoned Action, and subsequent Theory of Planned Behavior, as a tool for

predicting and understanding behavior can be an advantageous approach to

designing environmental education curriculum.

The Theory of Reasoned Action proposes that human behavior is usually

rational and is influenced by a person’s attitudes towards the behavior, and the

perception of the social environment and general subjective norms (beliefs about

what other people think the person should do or general social pressure). As the

name implies, the actions that the TRA covers are reasoned ones, and therefore the

behaviors are explicit, conscious decisions. The TRA is part of the expectancy-value

theories, which seeks to analyze the cognitive processes concerning a specific

behavior’s outcomes and its effect on intention to act (Gotch & Hall, 2004). As the

diagram below shows, the main constructs of the TRA are behavior, behavioral

intentions, attitudes, and subjective norms (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Both attitudes

and subjective norms, though, are predicted through the additional constructs of

Jill Stein11

beliefs (both behavioral and normative), evaluations (affective and cognitive), and

motivation to comply (Gotch & Hall, 2004).

(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975)

This model can be dynamic by allowing the arrow thickness between

constructs to vary depending on valence (positive or negative) and strength (or

extremity). This is helpful for envisioning how it works in applied settings with

environmental education, as forming curriculum with the specific intentions on how

to maximize the potential of each construct will make the chances of getting the

desired behavior more likely.

While the Theory of Reasoned Action sets the framework for the factors that

may contribute to behavior, it also may leave out important constructs, especially in

the context of environmental attitudes and behavior with children. Age, gender, or

socioeconomic status may be important variables to account for. Since children’s

BehaviorBehavioral Intention

Attitudes

Behavioral Beliefs Evaluation

Subjective Norms

Normative Beliefs

Motivation to

Comply

Jill Stein12

actions are often controlled (or perceived to be controlled) by their parents,

perceived behavioral control may be an especially relevant factor to consider. Using

Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior, which accounts for perceived behavioral

control, is therefore perhaps more suitable when working with children. Another

similar concept that may influence children’s environmental behavior is the locus of

control theory. Working within Rotter’s social learning theory, the perceived causes

of behavior lie on a continuum ranging from the two extremes of internal to external

loci of control (Rotter, 1966). Those with an internal locus of control perceive strong

connections between their own behaviors and their destiny, as well as the influence

their behavior has on the rest of the world. Those with an external locus of control

see less of a connection between their individual actions, their own quality of life,

and their impact on the world at large (Rotter, 1966). It has been suggested by

researchers, such as Smith-Sebasto and Fortner in 1994, that persons nearer the

internal end of the locus of control continuum will be more receptive to

participating in behaviors that conserve natural resources or benefit natural lands

(Alp, Ertepinar, Tekkaya, & Yilmaz, 2008). Keeping the idea of locus of control in

mind while facilitating EE experiences can be helpful when encountering individuals

with different levels of motivation and engagement. Helping to develop more

internal loci of control can be a powerful factor in predicting future pro-

environmental behavior.

A key construct within this theory is the idea of self-efficacy, which is a

person’s belief that s/he has the skills and abilities that are necessary to perform the

Jill Stein13

behaviors that achieve the desired outcomes (Heimlich & Ardoin, 2008). Bandura

recognized this, and described in his theory on social learning how a person’s self-

efficacy will influence if they take on new behaviors and/or change existing ones

(Bandura, 2001). This has serious implications on the effectiveness of EE

programming, since it shows that a focus on the affective nature of attitudes or

cognitive appeals to increasing environmental knowledge may be successful at

attaining those individual goals, but may not result in behavior change without the

additional support of how individuals are supposed to engage in specific pro-

environmental behaviors.

Environmental educational curriculum in Robin’s Bay should therefore

follow a social learning and action competence approach. Social learning explores

the development of the sense of self-efficacy, proposing that it is largely learned in

social contexts (Heimlich & Ardoin, 2008). The social-learning model proposes that

individuals engaged in the learning process become a learning community that is

both cooperative and collaborative in its goals and outcomes (Heimlich & Ardoin,

2008). A social learning framework therefore transfers the ownership of an

educational experience to the entire community and their unique lived experience.

The action competence approach follows this conceptual framework of self-efficacy

by using forms of teaching from which pupils acquire the courage, commitment and

desire to get involved in the social interests concerning these subjects, subsequently

learning to be citizens in a democratic society (Jensen & Schnack, 2006).

Jill Stein14

Methods

The Robin’s Bay primary school summer camp, which began in 2009, had an

enrollment of 55 students (1/3 female, 2/3 male) between the grades of 1-6. As

there are only about 90 students total in the primary school, this was a high turnout

and similar enrollment, if not more, is expected in the future. The eight-week

program has one session per week, which starts at 8:30am and ends at 3pm. Five

junior counselors from the village were hired and trained, as well as four senior

counselors with teaching experience. Campers were divided into five different

“houses,” each being balanced by age and gender. The original mission statement of

the camp was to “promote environmental awareness among the children by

teaching them about their natural world; the value of conservation, taking care of

their community, and helping the children gain an overall understanding of how our

actions impact our environment…” (Lockett & Wolf-Lockett, 2009). These goals

were supported through activities designated by weekly themes, such as Geography:

Learning About Our World or Agriculture: Plants and Animals that Feed Us. Four field

trips also assisted in applying real life experiences to the curriculum.

As stated in the previous literature review, the summer camp experience in

Robin’s Bay will consist of curriculum designed for “situated learning,” which is

context-bound to the phenomenological experience of the community. This will be

accomplished in several ways. The general framework for the curriculum will reflect

Bowers’ eco-justice model. The model addresses the following: (a) understanding

the relationship between culture and its environment; (b) addressing the social

Jill Stein15

injustice of environmental degradation; (c) acknowledgment and use of traditional

knowledge and practices that support ecological sustainability and (d) adopting

lifestyles that sustain the environment for future generations (Bowers, 2001). These

components will be put into actions, or experiences, using the action-competence

framework that values knowledge/insight, commitment, visions, and action

experiences (Jensen & Schnack, 2006).

Cultural relevance of the curriculum will be consulted through multiple

sources. A thorough examination by various teachers and community members in

Robin’s Bay will help give the curriculum the authentic context. Second, a portion of

the curriculum will be piloted with a school classroom early on the year to test its

response with the children. The curriculum will be inherently flexible to allow for

co-creation and ownership with the camp participants. Experiential based learning

by nature must allow for this, and this will assist in action-oriented initiatives that

will keep lessons and skills learned at camp going after it finishes the eight-week

session. The key goal of each “house” will be to create an environmental action plan

toward an issue of their choice. Through the detailed process of outlining how to

achieve their goals, an increase of perceived behavioral control and positive

behavioral intentions can become clear pathways towards pro-environmental

behavior.

The training of the counselors and staff will also be a fundamental method of

success for the program. The content of the curriculum is significant to the learning

outcomes of the participants, but the presentation of the content by the adults is just

Jill Stein16

as significant, if not more. The teaching staff must also feel connected to the goals

and behavioral outcomes and help the participants achieve them once the camp is

complete. Robin’s Bay is a small tight-knit village, and many of the camp staff works

with the kids in the school throughout the year. They will be a crucial resource for

support in facilitating a high amount of perceived behavioral control in the camp

participants towards pro-environmental behaviors and initiatives. A one to multi-

day staff training will take place prior to the start of camp, and will continue to grow

throughout the eight-week period with pre and post reflections at each weekly

session.

The evaluation component to the program will be supplying the more

quantitative data to support the qualitative curriculum construction. A culturally

relative, informal, and highly shortened version of the CHEAKS tool will be

implemented on the first day of camp to get a general idea of the participants

environmental attitudes and knowledge. At the end of camp, a more comprehensive

measurement will be done to test not only the attitudes and knowledge of the

participants, but the specific behavioral intentions toward the environmental action

plans that the campers will have created over the eight weeks. These measurement

tools will be developed under the guidance of the community teachers to ensure

content validity and relevance. Participatory evaluation techniques will be explored

to provide another layer of co-creation with the children for the future of the camp.

The actual proof of behavioral change will come later, as the action plans are used

outside the context of the summer camp.

Jill Stein17

Results:

Projected results from the project will be a deepened connection with the

natural world and an increase of engagement by the Robin’s Bay children in pro-

environmental issues. The increased level of citizen participation and self-efficacy

could have significant long-term effects for the Robin’s Bay youth, promoting better

lifestyles and develop the critical thinking and reasoning skills that are necessary to

be active contributors in a democratic society. Using the theoretical frameworks of

social psychology concerning the correlations between attitudes and behavior can

be a critical tool in creating a program with maximum effectiveness.

Jill Stein18

Works CitedAjzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 179-211.

Ajzen, I., & M., F. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Alp, E., Ertepinar, H., Tekkaya, C., & Yilmaz, A. (2008). A survey on Turkish elementary school students' environmental friendly behaviours and associated variables. Environmental Education Research , 129-143.

Ansell, N. (2006). Children, education and sustainable development in Lesotho. In J. Hill, A. Terry, & W. Woodland (Eds.), Sustainable Development: National insporations, local implementation (pp. 115-135). Aldershot, Ashgate.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review , 191-215.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology , 1-26.

Baver, S. L., & Lynch, B. D. (Eds.). (2005). Beyond Sun and Sand: Caribbean Environmentalisms. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Bowers, C. (2001). Educating for eco-justice and community. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.

Bowers, C. Education, cultural myths, and the ecological crisis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Byant, C., & Hungerford, H. (1979). An anlysis of strategies for teaching environmental concepts and values clarification in kindergarten. Journal of Environmental Education , 44-49.

Collins-Figueroa, M., Sanguinetti Hillips, G., E., F.-A., & C., F. (July 2-6 2007). Advancing Jamaican formal education through environmental education for sustainable development. World Environmental Education Congress. Durban, South Africa.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.

Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Evans, G. W., Brauchle, G., Haq, A., Steckler, R., Wong, K., & Shapiro, E. (2007). Young children's environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior , 635-659.

Jill Stein19

Ferguson, T. (2008). 'Nature' and the 'environment' in Jamaica's primary school curriculum guides. Environmental Education Research , 559-577.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Garrison, J. (1995). Deweyen pragmatism and the epistemology of contemporary social constructivism. American Educational Research Journal , 32 (2), 207-220.

Gotch, C., & Hall, T. (2004). Understanding nature-related behaviors among children through a theory of reasoned action approach. Environmental Education Research , 157-177.

Harland, P., Staats, H., & Wilke, H. (1999). Explaining proenvironmental intention and behavior by personal norms and the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 2505-2528.

Heimlich, J. E., & Ardoin, N. M. (2008). Understanding behavior to understand behavior change: a literature review. Environmental Education Research , 215-237.

Hines, A. (1993). Linking qualititative and quantitative methods in cross-cultural survey research: techniques from cognitive science. American Journal of Community Psychology , 729-747.

Hines, J., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. (1986/87). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environemental behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education , 1-8.

Hungerford, H., & Volk, T. (1990). Changing learner behaviour through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education , 8-21.

Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, K. (2006). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research , 471-486.

Kaiser, F. (1998). A general measure of environmental behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 395-422.

Leeming, F. C., & Dwyer, W. O. (1995). Children's Environmental Attitude and Knowledge Scale: Construction and Validation. Journal of Environemtnal Education , 22-32.

Leeming, F. C., & Porter, B. E. (1997). Effects of participation in class activites on children's environmental attitudes and knowledge. Journal of Environmental Education , 33-43.

Locke, S. (2009). Environmental education for democracy and social justice in Costa Rica. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education , 97-110.

Jill Stein20

National Environmental Education Committee. (1998). The national environmental education action plan for sustainable development. National Environmental Education Committee. Kingston, Jamaica: NEEC Secretariat.

Palmberg, I., & Jari, K. (2000). Outdoor activities as a basis for environemtnal responsibility. Journal of Environemental Education , 32.

Rotter, J. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs , 80 (1), 1-28.

Stern, P., Kalof, L., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G. (1995). Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: attitude formation toward emergent attitdue ojects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 25, 1611-1636.

UNESCO. (1980). Environmental education in the light of the Tbilisi conference. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO-UNEP. (1976). The Belgrade charter. Connect: UNESCO-UNEP Environmental Eucation Newsletter , 1 (1), pp. 1-2.

Walsh-Daneshmandi, A., & MacLachlan, M. (2006). Toward effective evaluation of environmental education: validity of the children's environmental attitudes and knowledge scale using date from a sample of Irish adolescents. Journal of Environmental Education , 13-23.

Wilhelm, S. A., & Schneider, I. E. (2005). Diverse urban youth's nature: implications for environmental education. Applied Environmental Education and Communications , 103-113.

World Travel and Trade Council. (2008). The 2008 Travel & Tourism Economic Research: Jamiaca. London, U.K.