Promoting Environmentally Responsible Behaviors in Elementary School Children

Promoting Environmentally Responsible Behaviors in Elementary School Children Through Whole School Sustainability Programs By: Kinzi Collins Kansas State University

Abstract People today are more aware then ever of the negative environmental effects that humans have had on Earth (Anderson, 2017). Slowly, people are trying to better their ways and “break” their bad habits. However, breaking habits can be extremely difficult, especially if those behaviors were learned at a very young age. In fact, studies show that humans actually learn what “right” and “wrongs” are as early as the age of two until about the age of seven (Braus & Wood, 1997).

This is why elementary schools should implement environmental education their schools. By doing this, educators can help guide the next generation during the most formative years of a child’s life to use environmentally responsible behaviors that will become the new “normal” behavior to them. Previous studies on several schools have shown that small or underdeveloped programs for environmental education are not very effective in instilling environmentally responsible behaviors in children (Igbokwe, 2016; Huston, 2018; Day, 2009).

However, it is generally agreed upon that the best approach to instilling these behaviors is through whole school sustainability programs (Barnett, 2014; Huston, 2018; Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Specifically, the whole school sustainability framework set up by Barr, Cross, & Dunbar (2011), focuses on three areas schools need for success which includes the school’s organizational culture, educational program, and the facility. Then, at the end of a child’s elementary education, the proposed method to determine these green schools’ effectiveness is through the ten question New Ecological Paradigm Scale for Children (NEP-C) survey (Manoli, Johnson, & Dunlap, 2007). Overall, interior designers have the ability to design elementary schools that can be used as a teaching tool and included as part of the environmental education program, as well as providing a healthier and more cost-effective building.

Contents/Outline I. II. II.

III. IV.

III.

IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X.

Introduction How Age Effects Comprehension Levels in Children a. How children learn Whole school sustainability framework a. Organizational Culture/Community i. Case Study of Organizational Culture Change Shortcomings ii. Case Study of Organizational Culture Change Success b. Educational Program/Curriculum i. Case Study of Educational Program/Curriculum Integration Shortcomings ii. Case Study of Educational Program/Curriculum Integration Success c. Physical Place/Facility & Site Design i. Case Study of Physical Place/Facility & Site Design Shortcomings ii. Case Study of Physical Place/Facility & Site Design Success Educational tools used to teach students about the building’s sustainable features Types of sustainable features that can be used as teaching tools a. Air quality b. Light c. Generating Electricity d. Thermal e. Water f. Reducing Waste g. Outdoor Classrooms Proposed Method a. New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) & New Ecological Paradigm for Children (NEPC) i. Limitations Discussion/Conclusions References Table and Figures Table and Figures References Literature Review/Process Annotated Bibliography Appendices a. NEP b. NEP-C

1

Introduction For decades, environmental issues have been at the forefront of society. “From the late 1960s onward, the growing recognition of the seriousness of environmental problems led to hundreds of studies [on] environmental attitudes and beliefs” (Manoli, Johnson, & Dunlap, 2007). It has become clear now more than ever, how important environmentally responsible behaviors are becoming. But breaking habits as an adult can be difficult. However, it is much easier to establish good habits in children during their most formative years and those habits are more likely to “stick” as they grow into adults (Phillips, 2019).

In fact, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (as cited in Leon Villasmil, 2018) states that the studies show that sustainability and environmental education should be introduced at a very early age in a child’s life because during this stage, children are developing basic values, attitudes, and behaviors that are likely to be long-lasting.

That’s why environmental education in schools is pertinent. According to NCES (as cited in Kensler & Uline, 2016), in 2013, there were “… 85,530 traditional public [schools], 4,480 public charter [schools], and 26,230 private schools. In other words, about twenty percent or 56 million people spend their days in schools each day, so it is important to consider all of the opportunities and challenges that are possible (Baker & Bernstein, 2012; Olson & Kellum, 2003). According to Chalabi (as cited in Leon Villasmil, 2018), that translates to children spending about 940 hours per year within a school. This presents a perfect opportunity to reach a large number of people in the future generations.

Children should learn environmentally responsible behaviors in elementary schools during the most crucial formative years of their life, so these positive behaviors are instilled and become natural to them, therefore effectively teaching the next generation to be more aware and environmentally responsible. Then, our society would have an entire generation committed to being environmental stewards due to the education they received as a child.

Several programs, organizations, and schools have tried several different methods of attempting to implement environmental education into the curriculum with varying levels of success (Barnett, 2014; Huston, 2018; Igbokwe, 2016; Speedie & Mulville, 2017; Tampoukou, Papafotiou, Koutsouris, & Paraskevopoulou, 2015). The challenge has been to find the right combination of factors to truly create a program that effectively teaches and informs children’s behavior when it comes to how they interact with the environment. It is now generally accepted and supported though research that the best way to implement and influence children’s environmentally responsible behaviors is through a whole school sustainability framework (Huston, 2018). To evaluate a school’s effectiveness, the New Ecological Paradigm Scale, or (NEP) designed by Dunlap and Van Liere can be used as it is used in most modern studies for environmental attitude assessments (Evans, Brauchle, Haq, Stecker, Wong & Shapiro, 2007, p.639; Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000).

These are the following questions this research will try to answer: What is the best way to influence children to adopt positive environmentally responsible behaviors and make them a part of their daily routine? How can designers design elementary schools to become the ultimate learning hub that integrates the building functions into the curriculum? Do children in these environmental schools form better environmentally responsible behaviors than children from a traditional school setting?

2

How Age Effects Comprehension Levels in Children In the United States, elementary school aged children range from age five to eleven or twelve, starting with kindergarten and ending in the 5th or 6th grade, depending on the state and school district policy (U.S. Department of Education, 2008). Table 1 illustrates the normal age range for each grade.

Leon Villasmil, (2018), discusses the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) that was developed by Icek Ajzen in 1991 which was designed “to predict and explain human behaviors.” The basis of the theory is that the stronger a person’s intention is to engage in a behavior, the greater chance this is for the person to perform the behavior (Leon Villasmil, 2018). Ajzen, (as cited in Leon Villasmil, 2018), describes the theory as such: According to the TPB, intentions and actions can be predicted by three determinants: attitudes (personal), subjective norms (social) and perceived behavioral control (selfefficacy). Attitude refers to the individual’s feelings of the behavior, which is the positive or negative disposition a person has toward performing a behavior. The subjective norm is defined as the social pressure to perform or not perform the behavior. Perceived behavioral control, is defined as the perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior. Therefore, people will perform a behavior when they determine it is positive, when they feel social pressure to perform it, or when they believe that they have the opportunities to do so. (Leon Villasmil, 2018) Furthermore, in a report by Braus & Wood (1997), they mention the research by Jean Piaget, a Swiss psychologist, on child comprehension levels by age. The research states that children up to about age seven to eight, or about the second-grade level, do not have the ability to reason or produce logic yet (Braus & Wood, 1997). Children anywhere between the ages of two to seven are just trying to comprehend rules and moral reasoning (Braus & Wood, 1997). This is why it is important for to introduce the “correct” environmental behaviors and respect for the environment as early as possible in a child’s life. Because of this, around age four to five is the time to start bringing the environment to their attention and even some environmental behaviors, such as recycling and that littering is bad (Braus & Wood, 1997; Leon Villasmil, 2018).

Moreover, according to Cindy Middendorf, who is an educational consultant and the author of The Scholastic Differentiated Instruction Plan Book, (Scholastic, 2009), in children aged four to seven, the right side of the brain is still developing and learning comes fairly easy though visual activities (Cleaver, 2019). Therefore, it is important to provide positive outdoor experiences for children and emphasis should be put on environmental awareness activities that rely on the five senses, especially visual, and on their feelings about the environment (Braus & Wood, 1997). If these concepts are introduced any later, students will most likely already have formed attitudes and beliefs that can be difficult to change (Braus & Wood, 1997).

Then, from about ages seven to eleven or twelve, or second to sixth grade, children begin to make judgments based on reason and logic using their knowledge on moral reasoning and start to form opinions. At this stage, it’s important to continue discussing and participating in activities focused on environmental awareness and issues and having students think about they feel about these issues (Braus & Wood, 1997). For example, to put their moral reasoning to the test, students can determine if the environmental behaviors they see from others are something that they agree or disagree with at this stage (Braus & Wood, 1997). Students are prepared for more information about the environment and can perform activities that focus on classifying,

3 comparing, organizing, and explaining what they observe (Braus & Wood, 1997). For the most part though, children in this stage use facts to solve problems (Braus & Wood, 1997).

Within this stage, from about ages nine to eleven is when children start to use more logic and comprehend more ideas show interest in others (Leon Villasmil, 2018). In fact, Cindy Middendorf, (Scholastic, 2009), also says that around ages ten or eleven is when the left side of the brain develops which includes the more analytical and language skills (Cleaver, 2009).

However, even though most children are not ready for conceptual or theoretical thinking yet, they can start to use some higher-level thinking skills to determine the key factors in environmental scenarios and thinking about what possible the possible ramifications are in these environmental problems (Braus & Wood, 1997). In fact, most children begin thinking at a higher level around the age of ten, but it does not become the preferred way of thinking until about eleven (Braus & Wood, 1997). Therefore, starting at this stage, and then continuing into their middle school years and beyond, children are beginning to think conceptually and theoretically and start to make their own educated guesses about situations and use logic in their reasoning (Braus & Wood, 1997). Children are beginning to have adult level thought processes at this stage and with the right guidance, they can start to analyze situations and make correlations between things and use their higher-level thinking skills (Braus & Wood, 1997). Moreover, this is the time to help the children use their critical and creative thinking skills and understand their role in causing and solving environmental issues to solidify earlier teachings about correct environmental behaviors (Braus & Wood, 1997). Activities such as simulations, case studies, questionnaires, creative writing, and more can help children develop a deeper level of psychological thought (Braus & Wood, 1997).

How Children Learn According to Ben Mardell, a PhD researcher at Harvard University, children learn through their senses (Cleaver, 2019). This means children should learn through multisensory experiences and activities, instead of just engaging one or two of the senses, such as the auditory and visual senses in a traditional classroom. It is generally understood that the five senses in include sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch. Likewise, it is understood that there are different learning styles such as visual, auditory, kinesthetic (tactile), social, and more (Cleaver, 2019). Not only is it important to include lessons that reach all types of learners, but research has shown that children retain information better by doing hands-on activities. Judy Dodge, the author of 25 Quick Formative Assessments for a Differentiated Classroom, (Scholastic, 2009), says that by listening, children are only activating one part of the brain, but by using movement, touch, talking, and listening, children are stimulating multiple areas of the brain and making connections. Furthermore, she says that the more parts of the brain that are used, the more likely children are to retain the information (Cleaver, 2019). Hands on activities will not only benefit the kinetic learners, but also the auditory and visual learners. And for social learners, groups discussions about what activity they are performing will best help them retain the information.

This is why using the school building as a teaching tool not only benefits the cost effectiveness of building operations, but also will help children learn and retain information better, which, in turn should generate a better understanding of what environmentally responsible behaviors are.

For example, environmental activities such as making a miniature city out of recycled materials or creating the butterfly’s life cycle from fabric scraps not only helps teach the environmental information, but also is a great way to incorporate hands on activities (Cleaver, 2019). In more advanced grade levels, instead of the teacher asking “Why does it rain?�, and children reciting the answers from textbook, they can work in groups on a report where they go outside and

4 observe rain, then use critical thinking skills and creativity to problem solve and demonstrate their answer together (Winthrop, Williams, & McGivney, 2016). These types of activities not only help children learn better, but they also instill a sense of empowerment into the children by letting them get a hand in their own education which may make them take more interest in what they are learning (Goodwin College, 2018). Additionally, research shows that getting up and moving can result in better focus, faster thinking, and greater memory retention that children who sit in one traditional classroom all day (Abdelbary, 2017). For example, by going outside or moving to a different room to participate in other types of hands on activities, children will have increased blood flow to the brain which will promote mental clarity and better learning.

The Whole-School Sustainability Framework According to several studies, research has shown that elementary schools are attempting to implement environmental education in several different ways including incorporating practices into the physical environment such recycling and lights-out campaigns, or integrating sustainability into educational programs such as “Earth day activities” or adopting a premade program such as “EcoSchools” (Barnett, 2014; Huston, 2018; Igbokwe, 2016; Speedie & Mulville, 2017; Tampoukou, Papafotiou, Koutsouris, & Paraskevopoulou, 2015). However, to effectively integrate sustainability into a school system, schools must do more than implement single programs and initiatives in order to see any change in children’s attitudes toward the environment (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Kensler & Uline (2016) go on to say that being able to “live” these practices, not just go thought the motions, is what makes the sustainable practices become the “normal” way to do things. Through the research Barr, Cross, & Dunbar (2014) have done, they also express that they have seen a countless number of schools struggle to implement a successful environmental education program into their school. They found that even the best green building designs can be lost on the students if the features are not properly integrated into the organizational culture and curriculum (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014).

Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar (2011) were the first to discover these findings by studying five Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified schools built between 2005 and 2010. They began their research as a part of an initiative by the Institute for the Built Environment at Colorado State University (CSU) to plan green school projects around the Fort Collins area (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011). Through their research, they developed what they called the whole-school sustainability framework, which they determined was the best way to successfully integrate an environmental education program into schools that influence children to participate in environmentally responsible behaviors (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011). This framework relies on the cooperation and participation in all aspects of a school including the facility and site (or physical place), organizational culture, and educational program for it to be successful (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011). This means that the framework encompasses everything that revolves around a school such as the school’s governance and culture, curriculum, resource management and grounds, extracurricular activities, school operations, physical environment, relationships with the community, and dedicated educators and administrators (Leon Villasmil, 2018). The basic framework can be seen in Figure 1. A few years later, the Institute for the Built Environment at CSU teamed up with the Center for Green Schools at USGBC (U.S. Green Building Council) and the U.S. Department of Education to further break down the guiding principles within the framework to help schools better understand how to use the framework to build their own program (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). They broke it down into nine guiding principles, with three principles in each area which can be seen in Figure 2. They also created a relationship map which displays the common themes found among the five schools studied and it shows the basic foundations, methods, and outcomes in

5 each area of the framework which can be seem in Figure 3. A simplified version of the relationship map is shown in the process model in Figure 4. Barr, Cross, & Dunbar (2014), stress that the whole-school sustainability approach requires individuals within a school to work together because it cannot be accomplished by one individual or department.

Organizational Culture/Community For a school to successfully integrate sustainability into its practices, the first step is organizational change (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Organizational change, which can include a new mission and vision, new practices and policies, possibly a change in some members roles within the organization, can be very difficult (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). All of these aspects together create a need for a complete change in the school’s culture.

Organizational culture includes the shared values, social norms, practices, tradition, mission, rituals, leadership, and programs within an organization (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011). The best way to instill environmental education into the core of a school’s culture, is to make sure it is clearly defined in the organization’s established mission, supported by interdepartmental collaboration, and all expectations and values are communicated effectively (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014).

The vision statement should be collaboratively created by the people involved in the organization because it will give them more motivation to see that is accomplished since they had a hand in developing it. The statement should easy for everyone, including the students, to understand and relate to the overall mission and goals of the school (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Stakeholders involved in these positive changes should include all departments and roles in a school including the educators, administrators, building managers, students, and community members (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Overall attitude towards change and changing culture is best achieved with the expectations are communicated simply, clearly, and through a variety of channels, such as personal interactions, email, newsletters, announcements, posters, assemblies, and social media (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014).

However, according to Day (2009), change also needs to come through the training of educators in preparation to use these new types of school buildings. One of the main reasons some of these attempts to implement a program have failed is because teachers are lacking the necessary training in environmental education (Day, 2009).

Case Study of Organizational Culture Change Shortcomings However, a school cannot be successful in teaching children environmentally responsible behaviors by changing the organizational culture alone as shown in the following study of a school in the New England region of the United States.

In this school, they were determining the best way to implement a form of environmental education as a way to attract new families to the district (Huston, 2018). The new principal took on the challenge of creating a new vision for the school and became very invested in taking on this new initiative for the school (Huston, 2018). However, even though the staff all agreed that the principal of the school had a great vision, passion, and support of the implementation of the program, most agreed that was a lack of support and understanding of what exactly the program was from the teachers and higher administration (Huston, 2018). The study concluded that best way to make an impact on the students would be to adopt a whole-school sustainability approach (Huston, 2018).

6 Case Study of Organizational Culture Change Success While preparing to start building several new schools in the year 2000, Poudre School District (PSD) established a Green Team, which included staff from across all of the facility’s departments (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). When asked why the Green Team was formed, the district architect explained that he could not do it all by himself and wanted to give the members who are a part of the school and who would actually be using the building, a chance to get involved in the school’s sustainability efforts (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Not only were members of the school engaged and bringing their own ideas on how to make the school more sustainable, but they were also starting to form what would be the beginning of the district’s “Sustainable Design Guidelines,” by being involved in this process (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). This shows that when leaders of the schools get involved in the process and invested in the concept of the school, they become more passionate about seeing its ideas implemented, which should yield a more effective program.

Educational Program/Curriculum The curriculum is an imperative part of the framework. Barr, Cross, & Dunbar (2014) describe that the first key to success in integrating sustainability into the educational program is to go back to the same committed leaders who showed support and participated in creating and communicating the school’s vision for organizational change. This can include anyone in the school such as teachers, principals, or custodians (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). The faculty leaders who encourage student engagement by allowing students to direct activities related to school operations such as, leading building tours, managing recycling and composting, tracking energy use, and caring for the school garden are great ways to let students have some control over their own education (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011). This gives students a sense of responsibility and empowerment and may actually make them take more interest in what they are learning. Giving student the power over these aspects of their education is important for the program’s long-term success and the creation of a generation of sustainability leaders (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Moreover, this will also give students a connection to their “place.” “A sense of “place” includes the physical and natural environment, as well as the history and culture of the surrounding community” (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014, p.14). By student connecting to their place, it strengthens the relationship between the school and the community, and helps students to understand complex, global issues by engaging at a local level (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014, p.14).

Case Study of Educational Program/Curriculum Integration Shortcomings Three elementary schools in England, all with sustainability features designed into the building, were studied to see those features helped teach the students about sustainability and promote environmentally responsible behaviors (Speedie & Mulville, 2017). After observing and interviewing the users, the study concluded that the schools were not effective in influencing the attitudes or behaviors of students because the sustainability features of the buildings were not well integrated into the curriculum (Speedie & Mulville, 2017). The researchers found that the teachers were unfamiliar with the building’s sustainable design concepts and were not provided with the resources needed to adequately teach students about the building (Speedie & Mulville, 2017). Because of this, the students were not engaging with any of the sustainable systems, nor did they understand the thinking behind them (Speedie & Mulville, 2017).

Case Study of Educational Program/Curriculum Integration Success

7 Mundo Verde Bilingual Public Charter School is a sustainability-focused public charter school located in Washington, DC (McNerney, 2017). They worked closely with the designers of their school to renovate their historic building and turn it into the ultimate sustainable teaching tool (McNerney, 2017). The school integrates the sustainable building features into their curriculum by having the students study a problem in depth for 10-12 weeks (McNerney, 2017). They consider the problem from different angles and create a final product that seeks to address it (McNerney, 2017). One example of these problems includes when students participate in a water conservation project each year (McNerney, 2017). In this project, the students study the school’s underground water cistern that collects rainwater from the rooftop and surrounding landscape and how it uses some of the water to flush the toilets (McNerney, 2017). At the end of the project, students usually determine that this feature saves the school 300,000 gallons of water each year (McNerney, 2017).

Physical Place/Facility & Site Design One of the most important aspects of the physical context of the schools that have been successful in implementing whole-school sustainability is that these building provide hands-on learning opportunities for students (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011). The goal of these building is to provide students and teachers the opportunity to experience the school building as a 3-D textbook (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Exposed green design systems show building processes and allow children to have the opportunity to interact with them, learning how efficient and renewable energy systems, and resource conservation systems work together in integrated fashion to create the ultimate learning environment (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

However, physical place not only includes the building but also the surrounding natural environment, and the resources that flow through the school (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). To best capture the idea of physical place, it must be engaging and active, be progressively more efficient, and embody systems that enhance human, environmental, and economic health (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). A school’s built and natural environment provides several opportunities for students to learn about sustainability, science, technology, conservation, the history of their community, and much more (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014).

Case Study of Physical Place/Facility & Site Design Shortcomings This study looked at a school in Ontario, Canada and studied the effectiveness of a program called EcoSchools on student awareness and effectiveness in teaching environmental education. After several observations and surveys given to students and teachers, the results showed that overall student environmental literacy was pretty low with only 29.3% of the students meeting the standard of environmental literacy scores in one test. When teachers were asked why they thought this was, one teacher thought that the old school building was a big part of it. The teacher noted that the building has old traditional utilities such as lead water pipes dated lighting. They went on to say that they believed the school’s systems needed to be excellent in terms of environmental efficiency in order to be able to better communicate good environmental practices to students.

Case Study of Physical Place/Facility & Site Design Success When Gloria Marshall Elementary School was selected to begin building their school, they decided that they should pursue a more sustainable design and create an opportunity for student learning (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). To do this they involved the teachers, students, and administration early in the design process. Based on those conversations, the designers

8 came up with a solution for the school which includes features such as an eco-pond, a windmill, and an above ground rainwater collecting cistern as they enter the new building (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). The design team made the sustainable features visible for the school and provided ways for students to engage with or manipulate the features (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). This is where the building begins to integrate into the curriculum. Through these features, students can view the rainwater being captured in the cistern and help regulate the water level of the eco-pond (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). The Discovery Center allows students to monitor the energy and water use of the building (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014). Life-size thermometers, worm boxes, and sundials all can be controlled by students and gives them an opportunity to engage in their learning (Barr, Cross, & Dunbar, 2014).

Educational tools used to teach students about the building’s sustainable features Besides regular instruction, lessons, and projects set up by the teachers in these schools, there are a few tools that can be used to help support the teacher’s efforts and used in almost all of the categories in the next section. First, systems that are exposed reveal building processes and allow students to be actively engaged in the operations of their school (Kensler & Uline, 2016). For example, in a hallway, a section of wall covered by glass could show pipes and wires that are typically hidden, but instead are displayed out in the open for everyone to see as shown in Figure 5. This is where the next tool is critical. Educational graphic signs can be displayed next to every teachable moment for all of the sustainable features within a building (Cole, 2013).

This way students have the opportunity to learn and follow along to see how the system is working in their school and all of the benefits it provides. See Figure 5 and Figure 6 for an example of educational signage. This can also be an aid for teachers while using the systems in their lesson plans. Lastly, monitoring systems doubling as interactive dashboards, can display changes in resource use, showing students their personal impact on energy use, water use, etc., and displayed economic savings to inform future building projects (Kensler & Uline, 2016). This gives students the opportunity to students observe, analyze, and report results they find within the dashboard (Kensler & Uline, 2016). This is also a great tool for teachers to use real-life situations and figures to create problems for the students to solve.

Types of sustainable features that can be used as teaching tools Air quality There is no question that Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) is an important aspect of every building, and students can learn what parts of their building play a role in making sure clean air is always present. For example, usually during construction of a building, there is dust and outgassing contaminants, typically because of conventional construction materials used, and can influence IAQ in negative ways (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Therefore, students can learn about sustainably sourcing naturally made building materials and finishes, including what kind of flooring, acoustic ceiling tiles, insulation, signage, and wall paneling is used in their classrooms to better understand the effect sustainable materials have on IAQ (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Through educational instruction from educators and signage showing the breakdown on these materials, students can better understand how every piece of a building can play a role in their health.

Additionally, according to the National Research Council (as cited in Kensler & Uline, 2016), design solutions that allow for natural ventilation in classrooms, combined with operable

9 windows and well-designed mechanical systems that can operate together, ensures an abundance of fresh air. For example, displacement ventilation systems introduce clean and fresh air at the floor level closer to the occupants, that a ceiling or upper wall vent, therefore achieving more comfort with less airflow (Kensler & Uline, 2016). In a displacement ventilation system, the air stays in the lower four to six feet of a room which, in addition to more comfort and less airflow, also makes acoustics and energy use easier to control (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Less air mixture also minimizes the distribution of dust and microbes (Gelfand & Freed, 2010).

Students can learn about these systems through graphic signage showing the flow of air and also through exposed wall systems that show the ventilation pipes behind a glass wall. In this case, students can learn exactly how a displacement ventilation system helps cut down on energy use.

Light Light has major effects on student health and energy costs and there are many ways in which students can learn all about the best practices in lighting. First, building orientation is a fundamental design choice for the control of light, due to the variations in available daylight at east, west, north and south sides of a building depending on the time of day and the time of year (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Students can learn about sun patterns according to the season and better understand why and how much sunlight their classrooms get during different times of the year.

Additional daylight design strategies that can cut a school building’s lifetime energy costs by 30– 70%, include the size and placement of windows in combination with clerestories, baffles, roof monitors, skylights, solar tubes, and light shelves, optimize daylight distribution and bring light deeper into a given space (Kensler & Uline, 2016; Olson & Kellum, 2003). To control the amount of light coming into a space, frosted glass and easily operable shades help to eliminate glare and provide teachers necessary control of lighting across the day and for different learning activities (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Another daylighting design solution is operable windows with low-E laminated glazing which minimize the ultraviolet and infrared light that can pass through glass without affecting the amount of visible light that enters a room (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

These windows stop the direct transfer of heat but not sunlight (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

All of the previous mentioned solutions can typically offer an abundant amount of natural light which would reduce the need for artificial light sources. Incorporating as many of these solutions as possible into the school would significantly help cut energy costs because artificial light sources are responsible for up to 60% of a school building’s energy consumption (Gelfand & Freed, 2010). However, the ideal lighting solution would include a coordinated system that utilizes daylighting in combination with indirect, direct, and energy efficient artificial lighting options, such as daylight dimming controls that automatically dim artificial light sources in response to the amount of daylight present and user need (Gelfand & Freed, 2010).

Additionally, occupancy sensors can be used to shut off lighting when no one is in the room (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Generating Electricity Green school leaders are also utilizing renewable energy technologies to power their schools and teach children about sustainable ways to create electricity and save on energy costs.

Biomass systems can be used to take advantage of biological waste materials to generate electricity (Gelfand & Freed, 2010). Additionally, photovoltaic systems use solar panels on roofs, shade surfaces, and facades (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Solar panels can be used to create

10 electricity for the school or even to heat the school’s water (Gelfand & Freed, 2010). According to the U.S. Department of Energy (as cited in Olson & Kellum, 2003), energy-efficient renovations such as replacement of inefficient boilers, lighting, and other systems, could reduce school energy costs by 30-60%. This is money that could be spent on hiring new teachers and purchasing textbooks, computers, and other instructional materials (Olson & Kellum, 2003).

Thermal Thermal comfort is something most people take for granted in buildings and probably do not give much thought to. However, there are several things children can learn about the systems that heat and cool a building. First, a building that is built with a high thermal-mass material on the exterior such as concrete and stone, helps to block any weather conditions outside along with features such as high-efficiency and double-paned windows, good building orientation for solar access and ventilation, and high R-value (thermal resistance) insulation (Taylor, 2009).

In a manual on efficient green school design written by LPA, Inc. (as cited in Kensler & Uline, 2016, p. 145), they describe the differences between wall thicknesses and its relation to the Rvalue a wall can receive: “A 2x4-framed wall, for example, will have an insulating value of R13 using conventional fiberglass batt insulation. A 2x6-framed wall, however, accommodates R19 insulation, which provides 50% more insulation (p. 37).� The higher the number is for the Rvalue in the insulation, the greater effectiveness the insulation has (Kensler & Uline, 2016). To avoid insulations with toxins, use soy-bean-based or cotton insulations (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Other features such as earth berms and green screens, placed along exterior walls, provide further insulation from heat gain, reducing HVAC use and energy consumption (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Moreover, thermally broken windows, with separator material between inner and outer window frame, prevent temperature transfer (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Geothermal systems, also known as ground source heat pumps, is a renewable energy source that draws heat from the Earth and disperses heat back into the Earth to heat and cool the building, and it can even heat water (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Water Water can be help or hindrance depending on the situation. There are so many things children can learn about the effects of water. One of the first things they can learn is that certain construction materials, such as masonry walls, have the capacity to store moisture and then dry without harmful effects (Kensler & Uline, 2016). To prevent water from causing any damage in or around the school, a well-designed drainage systems and HVAC condensation drainage systems should be installed to prevent water accumulation (Kensler & Uline, 2016). On the exterior of the building, students can see where the eaves and roof overhangs direct rainwater away from building walls, while the surrounding ground, which slopes away from the building, carries runoff out from the walls and foundation (Gelfand & Freed, 2010). Or, in contrast, the building could install a rainwater harvesting system and collect rainwater from the roof in an above ground cistern to show students how a rainwater harvesting system works and can be used. It can teach the children that the water can be used to water gardens and landscaping or it can be used in toilet and urinals (Gelfand & Freed, 2010). Likewise, water from sinks within the school can be reused through a greywater system and used again by filtering the water back into toilets and urinals or even as irrigation from the outdoor garden (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Also, plumbing fixtures such as those in kitchen facilities, restrooms, and gymnasium locker rooms can contain low flow toilets and have aerators on the sinks (Gelfand & Freed, 2010).

11 Green school leaders are incorporating bioswales into school grounds with native species that help to purify water runoff (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Bioswales are landscaping features used to slow, and filter stormwater from a large area (Soil Science Society of America, 2019). Green roofs, which also reduce water runoff, and bioswales can use drought tolerant grasses that require less irrigation and become a piece of the local habitat (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Other strategies such as avoiding midday watering, zoning irrigation by plant location and type, maintaining heads and filters, utilizing smart controllers, and using low-volume irrigation for gardens, trees, and shrubs together provide an integrated strategy for conserving water (Gelfand & Freed, 2010). Upper elementary students can use the knowledge gained from these features to graph monthly water bills and celebrate the efforts of their school’s operations and maintenance team (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Reducing Waste There are several ways students can learn to reduce waste in their daily routine at school. The first step is to ensure that recycling receptacles are regularly used and available throughout the school (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Moreover, staff can encourage more participation by setting up a school-wide sorting of recyclable, compost, and landfill waste (Kensler & Uline, 2016). By doing this, green school leaders are encouraging a culture of shared responsibility for waste reduction and management (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Additionally, schools can purchase cafeteria trays that can be composted or recycled (Kensler & Uline, 2016). In restrooms, users can have the option of an energy efficient hand dryer or paper towels made of recycled paper; the paper towels can be thrown into the compost can as explained by a sign above it (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Another trashcan in the restroom can collect non-compostable trash (Kensler & Uline, 2016).

Outdoor Classrooms There are also several opportunities to create “outdoor classrooms” with a variety of different teaching tools. For example, schools who want to get involved in habitat preservation and development can start with small projects such as butterfly gardens, bird feeders and baths, tree planting, sundials, weather stations, and native plant gardens, and small greenhouses (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Some larger projects include things such as wetlands, nature trails, meadows, stream restoration, shelters for small animals, and large vegetable gardens (Kensler & Uline, 2016). Grounds and gardens can be used to teach about “place,” and give students opportunities to practice conservation, as well as provide opportunities for project-based and hands-on learning activities (Barr, Leigh, & Dunbar, 2011).

Proposed Method New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) & New Ecological Paradigm for Children (NEP-C) There are several models to study environmental behaviors in adults, but these models are not necessarily appropriate for studying young children simply due to the comprehension level that comes with the age of the children. Most questions are not understood by the children. The most widely used and accepted method to study environmental attitudes in adults is the New Ecological Paradigm Scale, or (NEP) (renamed in the latest version from the previous name ‘New Environmental Paradigm Scale’) (Evans, Brauchle, Haq, Stecker, Wong & Shapiro, 2007, p.639). This scale was developed by Dunlap and van Liere in the 1970’s and since then has continued to be developed for over twenty years, eventually releasing an updated version in

12 2000, and is now used in most modern studies for environmental attitude assessments (Evans, Brauchle, Haq, Stecker, Wong & Shapiro, 2007, p.639; Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000). It focuses on evaluating human’s relationship and thoughts on the balance of nature, anthropocentrism (the rights humans have over nature), and the limits of human population growth (Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000; Evans, Brauchle, Haq, Stecker, Wong & Shapiro, 2007).

The updated 15 item (previously 10 item) scale in 2000 consists of two more evaluation criteria including “…the idea that human beings, unlike other species, are exempt from the constraints of nature (human exceptionalism), and additional items focused on concerns about the occurrence of potentially catastrophic environmental changes (ecocrisis)” (Evans, Brauchle, Haq, Stecker, Wong & Shapiro, 2007) (See Appendix A). This scale would be a good tool of measurement for determining if green elementary schools are effective in positively influencing children’s natural environmental behaviors as compared to traditional schools, however, it is still intended for studying adult behaviors, rather than children.

Therefore, in a study conducted by Evans et al., they decided to design a series of games to study children’s attitudes towards the environment based of the NEP model. These games were tested on one hundred first and second graders in the New York area (Evans et, al., 2007).

However, there were still issues with this study in some of the areas where the children could simply not comprehend certain questions or concepts in the games. They discovered through their analysis that anthropocentric reasoning develops more around the age of eleven (Evans et, al., 2007). Based off of this knowledge and seeing the limitations of this study, there could still possibly a better way to test the effectiveness of green schools with a whole school sustainability framework.

In 2007, another form of the NEP scale was developed and tested for studying upper elementary school children. After two years of revising the scale to better fit a 5th-6th graders comprehension level, they came up with the 10 item New Ecological Paradigm Scale for Children (NEP-C) (Manoli, C., Johnson, B., & Dunlap, R., 2007) (See Appendix B). They determined that with the “…revised wording, [the NEP-C] is appropriate for use with children ages 10–12 years” (Manoli, C., Johnson, B., & Dunlap, R., 2007). Therefore, this method could be used to study the effectiveness of a school with a whole school sustainability framework compared to students at a traditional school. The best way to do this would be to give students from the green school the survey at the end of the year in the 6th grade and do the same with the 6th grade students in a traditional school and compare the results.

In fact, a recent study asked this same question by surveying 275 students, ages 10 to 12, at seven primary schools in Victoria, Australia—three designed with sustainability features and four designed traditionally (Tucker, & Izadpanahi, 2017). The researchers used adapted versions of the New Ecological Paradigm Scale; which included the New Ecological Paradigm Scale for Children (Tucker, & Izadpanahi, 2017). Overall, the researchers found that the children at the schools designed for sustainably features had significantly more pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors than the children at the schools without a sustainability focus (Tucker, & Izadpanahi, 2017).

Because of this, the results of this study should yield similar results. If this proves to be true, initiatives should be put forth within the U.S. government to turn every elementary into a green school, working under the whole school sustainability framework. This method seems to be effective in guiding children to have environmentally responsible behaviors greater than that of

13 the previous generations. Therefore, for the sake of all humanity and for the sake of our planet, making all elementary school adopt this method should seem like a simple solution.

Limitations There are some studies that have used the NEP-C, but it still not widely tested in several studies yet to see if has the same reliability and validity of the traditional NEP. This study also only tested the questions with 5th grades from four different schools in the United States. While this is still a decent amount of testing, it may not accurately represent all children around the United States or the world. More testing of the scale should be done with children of other backgrounds, in other parts of the world, and with different comprehension levels for an a more accurate sample and factor of success.

Discussion/Conclusions Overall, the best way to approach implementing environmental education in elementary schools in through a whole school sustainability framework. Children should learn environmentally responsible behaviors in elementary schools during the most crucial formative years of their life, so these positive behaviors are instilled and become natural to them, therefore effectively teaching the next generation to be more aware and environmentally responsible. Because children form attitudes and beliefs about what is right and wrong between the ages of two and seven, it is imperative that environmentally responsible behaviors are taught as soon as children enter elementary school. If these ideas are taught any later, it may be much more difficult to try to change their already formed beliefs. While there have been many schools who have tried to implement some form of environmental education program, several have not been successful in changing children norms or behaviors when it comes to the environment. However, through the whole school sustainability framework, there have been many successes, because of the schools’ commitment to all three areas of the framework.

Some limitations of this research include that through research, it became evident that many teachers had a lot of confusion and lack of understanding of environmental education. More research should be conducted over this area in order to determine if this really is an issue for teachers. Additionally, more research should be organized to look at the best way to educate teachers on environmental education so that they can effectively implement these sustainability programs better than previous research has showed. Another resistance from teachers seemed to concern the amount of time to implement these practices into an “already tight� curriculum schedule under the Common Core State Standards. More research should look into the ways this framework can meet standards within Common Core. Likewise, no research was found on any schools who had attempted to use the whole school sustainability framework and failed.

Therefore, more research needs to be done to see if there are any schools who have not been successful with this framework.

The next step for this study is to get more green schools who have used the whole school sustainability framework, and traditional schools, to agree to hand out the NEP-C to their 5th and 6th grade students. This way more testing of the scale can be conducted and more comparisons between schools can be done to see if the results are consistent throughout. Likewise, further research would maybe include looking into why some schools would not want to implement environmental education into elementary schools. This would offer an alternative side to the study and may reveal some concepts or ideas that were not considered for this study.

14

References Abdelbary, M. (2017, August 9). Learning in motion: bring movement back to the classroom.

Education Week Teacher, First Person. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2017/08/08/learning-in-motion-bring-movementback-to.html Anderson, M. (2017). For earth day, here’s how americans view environmental issues.

Retrieved from Pew Research Center website: https://www.pewresearch.org/facttank/2017/04/20/for-earth-day-heres-how-americans-view-environmental-issues/ Baker, L., & Bernstein, H. (2012). The impact of school buildings on student health and performance. The Center for Green Schools. (Report). Retrieved from https://www.centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resourcefiles/McGrawHill_ImpactOnHealth.pdf Barnett, C. M. (2014). Paradigm shift in public education: Ridge and valley charter school 20002014. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Barr, S., Cross, J., & Dunbar, B. (2014). The whole-school sustainability framework. Institute for the Built Environment, Colorado State University. (Report). Retrieved from http://centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resource-files/WholeSchool_Sustainability_Framework.pdf Barr, S., Leigh, K., & Dunbar, B., (2011). Green schools that teach: Whole-School Sustainability (Report). Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Retrieved from http://www.carlsonstudio.org/hubfs/Green_School_That_Teach.pdf Braus, J. & Wood, D. (1997). Environmental education in the schools: Creating a program that works! (Manual No. M0044). Retrieved from the Peace Corps website: https://files.peacecorps.gov/multimedia/pdf/library/M0044.pdf Cleaver, S. (2019). Hands-on is minds-on. Scholastic Teacher. Retrieved from http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3751901 Cole, L. B. (2013). The teaching green school building: Exploring the contributions of school design to informal environmental education. Unpublished dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Day, E. (2009). Fostering whole-systems thinking through architecture: Eco-school case studies in Europe and Japan. (Master’s thesis). Cornell University, New York.

Dunlap, R., Van Liere, K., Mertig, A., & Jones, R. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. The Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425-442.

Evans, G. W., Brauchle, G., Haq, A., Stecker, R., Wong, K., & Shapiro, E. (2007). Young children's environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and behavior, 39(5), 635658. doi: 10.1177/0013916506294252 Gelfand, L., & Freed, E. (2010). Sustainable school architecture: Design for primary and secondary schools. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.

15 Goodwin College. (2018, December 17). How hands-on learning benefits children of all ages.

Goodwin College, ENEWS. Retrieved from https://www.goodwin.edu/enews/benefits-ofhands-on-learning/ Gordon, D. E. (2010). Green schools as high performance learning facilities. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities. Retrieved from http://www.ncef.org/pubs/greenschools.pdf Huston, W. G. (2018). Implementing education for sustainability in rural elementary schools: A collective case study of how leadership impacts the implementation of education for sustainability in rural elementary schools in northern new england (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Igbokwe, B. (2016). Environmental literacy assessment: Assessing the strength of an environmental education program (EcoSchools) in ontario secondary schools for environmental literacy acquisition (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Kensler, L. and Uline, C., (2016). Leadership for green schools: Sustainability for our children, our communities, and our planet. [Adobe Acrobat Pro DC version]. doi: 10.4324/9781315880525 Leon Villasmil, I. (2018). Promoting environmentally responsible behaviors in public elementary schools’ children. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

Manoli, C., Johnson, B., & Dunlap, R. (2007). Assessing children's environmental worldviews: modifying and validating the new ecological paradigm scale for use with children. The Journal of Environmental Education. 38(4). 3-13. Doi: 10.3200/JOEE.38.4.3-13.

McNerney, T. (2017, February 9). The walls do talk: using the school building as a teaching tool.

[Web log post]. Retrieved from https://greenschoolsnationalnetwork.org/walls-talk-usingschool-building-teaching-tool/ Msezane, S.B. (2017). Perceptions of youth about the integration of natural resource economics through environmental education in schools: A realist social perspective. Environmental Economics, 8(3), 70-75. doi: 10.21511/ee.08(3).2017.07 Olson, S., & Kellum, S. (2003) The impact of sustainable buildings on educational achievements in K-12 Schools. (Report). Madison, WI: Leonardo Academy Inc. Retrieved from http://www.cleanerandgreener.org/download/sustainableschools.pdf Ormond, C. G. A. (2013). Sustainability education as teacher education: A mixed methods study of a place-based learning environment (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

Phillips, A. (2019, January). Children and the environment: Why it’s important to them young. EThe Environmental Magazine. Retrieved from https://emagazine.com/children-and-theenvironment/

16 Soil Science Society of America. (2019). Rain gardens and bioswales. Retrieved from https://www.soils.org/discover-soils/soils-in-the-city/green-infrastructure/importantterms/rain-gardens-bioswales Speedie, C. & Mulville, M. (2017). Educational Buildings as Educational Buildings: Can sustainable architecture help support sustainability in the curriculum? In Brotas, L., Roaf, S. & Nicol, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of 33rd PLEA International Conference Design to Thrive, Edinburgh, 2-5th July 2017. ISBN 978-0-9928957-5-4 Tampoukou, A., Papafotiou, M., Koutsouris, A., & Paraskevopoulou, A. (2015). Teachers' perceptions οn the use of botanic gardens as a means of environmental education in schools and the enhancement of school student benefits from botanic garden visits. Landscape Research, 40(5), 610-620. Doi: 10.1080/01426397.2014.947250 Taylor, A. (2009). Linking architecture and education: Sustainable design of learning environments. [Adobe Digital Editions version]. Doi: LB3205 --. T39 2009eb Tucker, R., & Izadpanahi, P. (2017). Live green, think green: Sustainable school architecture and children’s environmental attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 209-216.

U.S. Department of Education, International Affairs Office. (2008). Organization of U.S. Education: The school level. Retrieved from: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/schoollevel.doc Winthrop, R., Williams, T.P., & McGivney, E. (2016, July 14). Accelerating progress in education with hands-on, minds-on learning. [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/education-plus-development/2016/07/14/acceleratingprogress-in-education-with-hands-on-minds-on-learning/

17

Tables and Figures

Table 1: Typical ages of elementary school children by grade level.

Figure 1: The basic whole-school sustainability framework.

18

Figure 2: The whole school sustainability framework with the nine guiding principles

Figure 3: This is the relationship map displays the common themes found among the five schools studied and it shows the basic foundations, methods, and outcomes in each area of the whole school sustainability framework.

19

Figure 4: Process model showing a simplied version of the results of the relationship map.

Figure 5: Exposed greywater pipes system next to educational signage.

20

Figure 6: Example of educational signage that could be next to all sustainable features in a school.

Figure 7: Interactive monitor dashboards at a school in New York.

21

Tables and Figures References Table 1. Stamford American International School. (2019). List of typical ages of elementary school children by grade. [Table]. Retrieved from https://www.sais.edu.sg/admissions/gradelistings/ Figure 1. Barr, S., Leigh, K., & Dunbar, B., (2011). The basic whole-school sustainability framework. [Graphic]. Retrieved from http://www.carlsonstudio.org/hubfs/Green_School_That_Teach.pdf Figure 2. Barr, S., Cross, J., & Dunbar, B. (2014). The whole-school sustainability framework with nine guiding principles. [Graphic]. Retrieved from http://centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resource-files/WholeSchool_Sustainability_Framework.pdf Figure 3. Barr, S., Cross, J., & Dunbar, B. (2014). Relationship map for the whole-school sustainability framework. [Graphic]. Retrieved from http://centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resource-files/WholeSchool_Sustainability_Framework.pdf Figure 4. Barr, S., Cross, J., & Dunbar, B. (2014). Process model for the whole-school sustainability framework. [Graphic]. Retrieved from http://centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resource-files/WholeSchool_Sustainability_Framework.pdf Figure 5. VMDO. (2009). Glass wall showing exposed pipes and educational signage. [Image].

Retrieved from https://www.vmdo.com/manassas-park-elementary-pre-k-signagewayfinding.html Figure 6. Leon Villasmil, I. (2018). Graphic Illustrating the Importance of Recycling. [Graphic].

Figure 7. Ewing, J. (2016). P.S. 62 interactive energy dashboards. [Image]. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@SOM/the-making-of-new-york-s-greenest-school93dc20322ac4#.s9j0xgwbc

22

Literature Review/ Process People today are more aware then ever of the negative environmental effects that humans have had on Earth. Slowly, people and companies are trying to better their ways and use more environmentally conscious behaviors and products. In other words, we are trying to “break” our bad habits. But breaking habits can be extremely difficult, especially if that is how we learned to do things from a very young age. But what if these positive environmentally conscious behaviors were the learned habits from a young age and we thought that was the normal way to do something? We can do this be implementing environmental education into elementary schools.

About twenty percent or 56 million people in the U.S. spend their days in elementary and high schools (Olson & Kellum, 2003). This is a huge opportunity to use “green buildings” and programs to influence positive environmental behaviors. Generally speaking, children do not have a significant understanding of the environment or environmental behaviors (Leon Villasmil, 2018). There are several frameworks and examples of schools that have been successful in implementing some kind of environmental education program into their schools. Interior designers have the ability to design elementary schools with sustainable functions in mind that can be used as teaching tools and a part of the environmental education program that the school implements into their curriculum.

The resources on this topic were gathered from the following sources: Google Scholar, K-State Libraries “Search-it”, and ProQuest. First, while searching Google Scholar, I used the words “sustainability in elementary schools” and it had 114,000 results. I only looked at the first few results, as the others did not seem to realte to the topic. I also searched the words “environmental behaviors in elementary schools” and it gave 393,000 results. Likewise, I searched “environmental behaviors” and it had 3,580,000 results. This search proved to be too broad and did not yield any relevant sources. Next, I used the K-State “search-it” feature to search the keywords “ways to implement environmental behaviors” which delivered 246,587 results. Although this did provide a lot of sources, many of the did not relate to education.

Therefore, I then searched the words “sustainability in elementary schools” and received 44,176 results. This search yeailded a smaller number of results but many of the sources were much more relevant to the topic. Then, I searched “environmental behaviors” and got 1,206,687 results which again proved to be too broad of a search. Moreover, I searched “environmental education in schools” which produced a few very good and relevant resources as well. Since I had been coming across a lot of dissertations, I also narrowed this search to just “articles” to try to mix up my results a bit more. This seemed to help and yielded a couple of good articles.

Lastly, in ProQuest, I searched the keywords “sustainably AND (elementary schools)” which produced 92,907 results as well as the keywords “(sustainability education) AND elementary” which delivered another 39,307 results. Both of these searches produced several relevant and helpful resources.

23

Annotated Bibliography Blog post McNerney, T. (2017, February 9). The walls do talk: using the school building as a teaching tool.

[Web log post]. Retrieved from https://greenschoolsnationalnetwork.org/walls-talk-usingschool-building-teaching-tool/ This blog talked about Mundo Verde Bilingual Public Charter School and how they have successfully integrated environmental education into their curriculum and physical building.

Winthrop, R., Williams, T.P., & McGivney, E. (2016, July 14). Accelerating progress in education with hands-on, minds-on learning. [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/education-plus-development/2016/07/14/acceleratingprogress-in-education-with-hands-on-minds-on-learning/ This blog was about the importance of hands on learning for children. It emphasized using group work and observational projects instead of just learning from a textbook.

Books Gelfand, L., & Freed, E. (2010). Sustainable school architecture: Design for primary and secondary schools. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.

This book described several methods and ways to implement sustainable features into a school building. It also described the benefits to each feature.

Kensler, L. and Uline, C., (2016). Leadership for green schools: Sustainability for our children, our communities, and our planet. [Adobe Acrobat Pro DC version]. doi: 10.4324/9781315880525 This book argues for the need of sustainable practices in schools and the benefits it has on both elementary and high school kids. Moreover, it argues several points as to why and how certain practices implemented into a school can teach and benefit students and is just as important as required courses. It then dives deeper into how the physical building and how embedding these ideals into the school concepts can be a way to better enforce environmental education.

Conference Paper Proceedings Retrieved Online Speedie, C. & Mulville, M. (2017). Educational Buildings as Educational Buildings: Can sustainable architecture help support sustainability in the curriculum? In Brotas, L., Roaf, S. & Nicol, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of 33rd PLEA International Conference Design to Thrive, Edinburgh, 2-5th July 2017. ISBN 978-0-9928957-5-4 Three elementary schools in England, all with sustainability features designed into the building, were studied to see those features helped teach the students about sustainability and promote environmentally responsible behaviors (Speedie & Mulville, 2017). After observing and interviewing the users, the study concluded that the schools were not effective in influencing the attitudes or behaviors of students because the sustainability features of the buildings were not well integrated into the curriculum

24 (Speedie & Mulville, 2017). The researchers found that the teachers were unfamiliar with the building’s sustainable design concepts and were not provided with the resources needed to adequately teach students about the building (Speedie & Mulville, 2017).

Because of this, the students were not engaging with any of the sustainable systems, nor did they understand the thinking behind them (Speedie & Mulville, 2017). For example, the researchers note that sustainability features like solar panels, increased insulation, and double-glazed windows are were all present but never explained.

Automatic features like motion sensor lighting can seem irrational if their purpose is not clearly explained (Speedie & Mulville, 2017).

Doctoral Dissertations Barnett, C. M. (2014). Paradigm shift in public education: Ridge and valley charter school 20002014. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

This source focuses on the school framework model in place at the Ridge and Valley Charter School (RVCS) rural elementary school in Blairstown, New Jersey. This schools consists of 128 children in kindergarten through eighth grade. Their goal is to begin a paradigm shift in the types of things learned in elementary schools. Specifically, this includes the five components of the RCVS mission: “mutually-enhancing relationships, outdoor learning, and experiential, integrated, differentiated education” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 13). While the paper talks about better students learning in several areas of school topics, small parts of it include environmental education and how to best achieve it. In fact, Barnett claims that the entire study was “[m]otivated by concern over the impact of human behavior on the planetary ecosystem…” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 183). The author also states that “RVCS has always been an outlier, understandable for a school whose mission is to change the paradigm of human-earth relationships” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 161). Particularly, pages 66-70 focuses on ways that the school specifically incorporates elements of environmental education. The school puts emphasis on experiential, project, and place-based learning as a part of their learning culture. Therefore, they do the following things: they use recycled modular buildings and have a “Water Only at School policy, which establishes the expectation that students and staff will rely on water rather than juice, soda, or sweetened sports drinks for healthful hydration while at school” (Ridge and Valley Charter School, Policy) (Barnett, 2014, pg. 67). “Accepting donated and buying used office and classroom furniture, equipment, books, and instructional materials reduces costs for Ridge and Valley and gives new use to quality items no longer needed by the previous owners” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 67). “Installation of solar panels on the school property was an early initiative to reduce consumption of coal-fueled electricity, promote clean locally-produced energy use in the community, and lead to eventual energy selfsufficiency. With the support of Rutgers Cooperative Extension and the local township engineer, a rain garden for storm-water management was installed at the school in 2012 to improve drainage, reduce Storm water discharge into area streams, and contribute to onsite sustainability education” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 67). They also prioritize buying local materials and supplies as one of there school policies. A neighboring farm called Genesis Farms is used as a learning tool for the “[p]romotion of local agriculture, seasonal eating, and smaller scale farming [and how it] is essential to

25 building sustainable communities” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 68). They “… help students establish and maintain the school’s extensive vegetable, flower, and herb gardens, fruit trees and bushes, orchard, root cellars, and greenhouse. Classes regularly learn about the economic implications of local agriculture while enjoying salad greens they planted themselves” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 68). “Students have participated in recycling drives, clean-up projects, and fund- and consciousness-raising events in conjunction with local groups, raising awareness of sustainable practices to support the community (McKenzie-Mohr 74). One culminating annual event, the RVCS Earth Olympics, focuses on sustainability in several areas. Students move through stations exploring conservation and use of water, alternative energy sources, subsistence shelter building, outdoor survival skills, recycling, and re-purposing. Multi-aged teams cooperate to make a fire with a bow-drill, bake bread in a solar oven, test the water quality of the local stream, race to build a waterproof debris hut, identify edible plants, and inventory local species (Ridge and Valley Charter School, “Program”). The events of the Earth Olympics invariably lead students to reflect on the many conveniences and consumption habits modern Americans take for granted, the importance of sustainability in interpersonal relationships, and the impact of individual choices on sustainability” (Barnett, 2014, pg. 70). To test student retention, they mention that standard testing does not touch on any of these subjects and were on the hunt for other ways to test the student’s knowledge. They ended up using two methods: a Gallup Student poll for 5th through 12th graders with emphasis on students’ hope, engagement, and well-being for their current students, and a survey created for RVCS alumni to test graduates knowledge and feelings on the schools teaching methods and the effect it had on them as they enter the next phase of their lives. One RCVS student mentioned this in the alumni survey comments section: “The benefits of outdoor, experiential education were repeatedly noted: “RVCS showed me to really love the earth! I'm pretty ‘indoorsy’, but RVCS got me outside a lot and I loved it. I appreciate nature much more than I did before RVCS” and “I really appreciated being able to leave the classroom on a daily basis to move around and explore the outdoors. The hands-on learning approach really helped me to find purpose and meaning in what I was learning” (Ridge and Valley Charter School, 2013) (Barnett, 2014, pg. 179).

Cole, L. B. (2013). The teaching green school building: Exploring the contributions of school design to informal environmental education. Unpublished dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. This paper talks about systems in a building that benefit student learning and how it affects their health. It is also referenced several times in the “Leadership for Green Schools” book.

Crede, J. L. (2009). Nature immersion: A model of sustainability education (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

This source talks about wanting to include concepts of sustainability in formal education, but its focus is on higher education and none of the research can really be applied to elementary education, therefore, I will not be using this source.

26 Huston, W. G. (2018). Implementing education for sustainability in rural elementary schools: A collective case study of how leadership impacts the implementation of education for sustainability in rural elementary schools in northern new england (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

This source is a case study that focuses on three rural schools in the New England area, specially, one in New Hampshire and two in Vermont. Huston decided to take on studying Education for Sustainability (EFS) because as a new principal to a small rural school, they were looking for ways to increase enrollment as enrollment had been down over the last several years. They were looking for ways to stand out and attract young families tot the area. They determined that one of the ways they could do this was through implementing EFS in the school. The author’s research question was as follows: “In what ways does leadership affect the implementation of Education for Sustainability (EFS) in rural elementary schools found in northern New England?”

(Huston, 2018, pg. 5). He defines the terms environmental education which “is a process allowing individuals to explore environmental issues, engage in problem solving, and take action to improve the environment (“What is environmental education?, n.d.)”

(Huston, 2018, pg. 10). He also defines “Education for Sustainability, or EFS, is integrating the principles of sustainability into the work of educators as well as institutional practices, culture, and community partnerships (Cirillo & Hoyler, 2015)” (Huston, 2018, pg. 10). Overall the author was just studying how important leadership was to implement this type of program. “The leader’s vision, passion, and support were the top three ways that participants identified as ways the principal facilitates the school’s implementation” (Huston, 2018, pg. 65). The main issue for implementation in these rural schools is the lack of development around the EFS program and the lack of teachers and higher administration support or understanding of what EFS is. Many teachers felt there was a lack of whole school initiative behind EFS. Therefore, the author concluded that, “to create the biggest impact upon students and the community at large, schools needed to adopt a whole-school approach to sustainability (Cirillo & Hoyler, 2015)” (Huston, 2018, pg. 27).

Igbokwe, B. (2016). Environmental literacy assessment: Assessing the strength of an environmental education program (EcoSchools) in ontario secondary schools for environmental literacy acquisition (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

This source studies the “EcoSchool” Program in Ontario, Canada schools and its effectiveness on its students. They use the “Middle School Environmental Literacy Survey (MSELS), the EcoSchools Questionnaire and EcoSchools Teacher Coordinator Questionnaire were used to assess students’ environmental literacy (EL), awareness levels, source of environmental knowledge, the visibility of the EcoSchools program, and finally, the EcoSchools teacher co-ordinator’s perception of the program in the participating school board” (Igbokwe, 2016, pg. iv). The result of the study showed that overall, even though most schools have adopted this program, many teachers do not know how to use the program to its full extent and most students were unaware that their school was even apart of the program. Results of the study also showed that student environmental literacy (EL) was overall pretty low. “Only 29.3% of the students were deemed as having met the provincial standard of level

27 3 (70% or higher) in the EL scores” (Igbokwe, 2016, pg. iv). “…some of the teachers interviewed believed that the EcoSchools program has created a significant level of environmental awareness within the school community and with a few modifications, such as providing more time for the teachers to plan and implement the program, the EcoSchools would be capable of being an outstanding EE programs that promoted EL, awareness and students participation in environmental matters” (Igbokwe, 2016, pg. iv).

Lynam, A. (2014). Embracing developmental diversity: Developmentally aware teaching, mentoring, and sustainability education (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

This source studies graduate level students and the faculty at Prescott college on adult learning in sustainability education and leadership development, therefore, it will not be relevant to my topic.

Ormond, C. G. A. (2013). Sustainability education as teacher education: A mixed methods study of a place-based learning environment (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

This source is about training teachers to become certified to teach environmental education (EE). In January 2011 the Sustainability Education in an Environment of Diversity (SEEDs) module was implemented as a pilot in the Professional Development Program (PDP) of Simon Fraser University’s Faculty of Education. A teacher education module focused on environmental education (EE), SEEDs was similar in general purpose and structure to the other modules in the PDP in that it was designed to educate students to meet the general requirements for teacher certification. What made the SEEDs module unique was that it provided a range of place-based and outdoor field experiences and required teacher candidates to register for a placebased EE field course in Haida Gwaii. The general goal of the module was to develop educators who displayed the motivation and capacity to become key change agents in transforming education and society to progress towards a more sustainable future” (Abstract). “The questionnaire PLACES is a learning environment instrument developed to describe and measure “student perceptions of environmental education in place-based education settings” (Zandvliet, 2012, p. 125). Several definitions of environmental education were introduced including the following: “Environmental education is the process of recognizing values and clarifying concepts in order to develop skills and attitudes necessary to understand and appreciate the interrelatedness among man [sic], his culture, and his biophysical surroundings.

Environmental education also entails practice in decision-making and self-formulation of a code of behaviour about issues concerning environmental quality. (IUCN, 1970)” (Ormond, 2013, pg.11). “Environmental education is a process aimed at developing a world population that is aware of and concerned about the total environment and its associated problems, and has the attitudes, motivations, knowledge, commitment and skills to work individually and collectively towards solutions of current problems and the prevention of new ones” (Ormond, 2013, pg.12). “With regards to EE implementation, in most cases the teacher candidates appeared to have adopted a view of EE in schools as being realistically implemented through an infusion approach within the ongoing curriculum combined with a commitment to experiential and place-based

28 approaches to learning. Lastly, their responses suggest the power of modeling in a learning environment or experience: students appreciate learning about concepts and ideas, but they deeply appreciate seeing those ideas and concepts applied to their own professional learning experiences” (Abstract).

Electronic version of print book Taylor, A. (2009). Linking architecture and education: Sustainable design of learning environments. [Adobe Digital Editions version]. Doi: LB3205 -- .T39 2009eb This talks about designing for education spaces and the effect a building has on a student.

Journal Articles with DOI Evans, G. W., Brauchle, G., Haq, A., Stecker, R., Wong, K., & Shapiro, E. (2007). Young children's environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and behavior, 39(5), 635658. doi: 10.1177/0013916506294252 This article studies one hundred 1st and 2nd graders in rural areas in upstate New York and their environmental attitudes. They use Dunlap and van Liere’s NEP (New Ecological Paradigm Scale) to study this process. However, instead of questions, they used a set of games they devised to work for their younger subjects. They then reported their results according to the three games and discussed their findings.

Manoli, C., Johnson, B., & Dunlap, R. (2007). Assessing children's environmental worldviews: modifying and validating the new ecological paradigm scale for use with children. The Journal of Environmental Education. 38(4). 3-13. Doi: 10.3200/JOEE.38.4.3-13.

This study modified the NEP scale to make it work for upper level elementary students.

They modified the scale over three years based on the feedback from several fifth-grade students in the United States.

Msezane, S.B. (2017). Perceptions of youth about the integration of natural resource economics through environmental education in schools: A realist social perspective. Environmental Economics, 8(3), 70-75. doi: 10.21511/ee.08(3).2017.07 This journal is about implementing environmental education (EE) into the South African school system also known as CAPS. They get study 80 grade 12 students and test implementing EE in the schools and then get their perceptions on the effectiveness of it.

They use Margaret Archer’s realist social theory (RST) to complete this study. They found students were positive and welcoming towards EE integration into the school system. Šimonová, P., & Činčera, J. (2016). Do Environmental Education School Coordinators Have a Mission? Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 7(1), 23-36. Doi: 10.1515/dcse-2016-0002 This talks about the role teachers have in a green school. It talks about teacher training techniques in the Czech Republic and the amount of hours they receive training.

However, I didn’t end up needing this source.

29 Tampoukou, A., Papafotiou, M., Koutsouris, A., & Paraskevopoulou, A. (2015). Teachers' perceptions οn the use of botanic gardens as a means of environmental education in schools and the enhancement of school student benefits from botanic garden visits. Landscape Research, 40(5), 610-620. Doi: 10.1080/01426397.2014.947250 This article is about the use of botanical gardens and their role in environmental education in the Greece school system. A survey questionnaire was distributed to teachers in both primary and secondary education asking about the use of botanical gardens as environmental educational tools and then then reported their findings. Only about 1/3 of teachers use them as tools and feel that they could be better set up to be used as such.

Journal Articles without DOI Blanchet-Cohen, N., & Reilly, R.C. (2013). Teachers' perspectives on environmental education in multicultural contexts: Towards culturally-responsive environmental education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 12.

This paper is about teachers implementing EE into schools in focusing on it in a multicultural context. After reading further into the paper, the authors focus mainly on talking about immigrants and indigenous people and diversity, therefore it was determined that this will not be relevant to the research topic. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

Conde, M., & Sanchez, S. (2010). The school curriculum and environmental education: A school environmental audit experience. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education 5(4), 477-494. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ908944.pdf This article studies 13 elementary schools in Spain on the integration of environmental education into the classroom. They lay out a framework that starts with teachers and ends with the monitoring and evaluation of the students. They broke up the plan into two cycles, one for the first year of implementation and one for the second year of implementation with adjustments made from lessons learned in the first year. The end of the article charts the progress each school made. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

Dunlap, R., Van Liere, K., Mertig, A., & Jones, R. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. The Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425-442.

This article is on the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Scale by Dunlap and Van Liere and the revised parts of the scale. This scale is was originally developed in the 1970’s to study people’s thoughts on human’s ability to disrupt the balance of nature, the presence and limits of the human population, and humans’ right to rule over nature. It basically tests people in different areas of environmental issues and human’s role in these areas. This scale would be a good tool of measurement for determining if green elementary schools are effective in positively influencing children’s natural environmental behaviors as compared to traditional schools.

Martins, A. A., Mata, T. M., & Costa, C. A. (2006). Education for sustainability: challenges and trends. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 8(1), 31-37.

30 This article talks about the for sustainability in society as a whole. It then dives into ways that can be achieved and helpful when developing ideas around this topic. It also mainly focuses on the questions that surround education for sustainability (ES). They emphasize the importance of making the younger generation aware of the basics of sustainability and state that these subjects should be a part of their required school courses. It also talks about how to implement sustainability on a high school and university level which may not be as helpful but could help guide me when making a long-term solution plan on this research topic. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

McFarlane, D. A., & Ogazon, A. G. (2011). The challenges of sustainability education. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(3), 81-107.

This article talks about the challenges of sustainability education but in a higher education and universities sense, therefore, I believe it focuses on a level that is much higher than the research topic, so I will not be using this resource.

Noppakroh, N., Singseewo, A., Wongchantra, P., & Chookhampaeng, C. (2012). A study operations environmental education in schools: The northeast of Thailand. European Journal of Social Sciences, 32(3), 441-446.

Never received from interlibrary loan.

Tucker, R., & Izadpanahi, P. (2017). Live green, think green: Sustainable school architecture and children’s environmental attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 209-216.

One recent study addressed this question by surveying 275 students, ages 10 to 12, at seven primary schools in Victoria, Australia—three designed with sustainability features and four designed conventionally. The researchers used adapted versions of the New Ecological Paradigm scale, which measures an individual’s level of endorsement of a pro-ecological worldview, and the General Ecological Behavior scale, which covers different types of ecological and social behavior. The researchers found that the children at the schools designed for high performance had significantly more pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors than the children at the schools without a sustainability focus.

(Tucker, & Izadpanahi, 2017) Venkataraman, B. (2009). Education for sustainable development. Environment, 51(2), 8-10.

This article talks about the difference between EE and ESD. It then goes into current efforts where ESD is being put into practice. They talk about the U.S. Partnership for Education for Sustainability which has student learning standards for students all the way from kindergarten to 12th grade. The examples mentioned focus more on middle and high school students. There is one part where it mentions fifth graders. This may not be very helpful in regards to applying practices to elementary schools but could be helpful with the difference and definitions of EE and ESD. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

Master’s Theses

31 Berg, R. (2010). Best practices of five canadian ecological education (ECE), environmental education (EE) and education for sustainable development (ESD) pre-service teacher educators (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest One Academic. (Order No. MR71751) This study looked at the ways five schools in Canada were implementing environmental education. They found that a variety of activities were helpful and effective in teaching students about the environment. They also conducted interviews to get more information about the effectiveness. Teachers were to have certain qualifications to be eligible for the study and be knowledgeable enough on the topic to have published something they had written that was relevant to this topic. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

Day, E. (2009). Fostering whole-systems thinking through architecture: Eco-school case studies in Europe and Japan. (Master’s thesis). Cornell University, New York.

This thesis studies eco-schools in England, the Netherlands, and Japan and the factors involved in making a whole school program that effectively teaches students environmental behaviors. Their other main goal for this study included figuring out if ecoschools positively influence a student’s way of thinking in regard to the environment and in comparison, to traditional schools. They talk a lot about the definition of a green school and the terms and systems associated this type of school. They also dive into the costs associated with a green school and how funding can be achieved. Studies found that on average, schools had about 14 environmental features and about 5 environmental actives, with the majority consisting of gardening or field trips. To study if the student’s way of thinking was affected, they used a 28-item scale from Masser and Malkus from 1994. Where they fell short in this area was not having any traditional schools to study so the results did not show a significant difference in environmental behaviors.

Fernandes, K. J. R. (2012). Hidden in plain view: A search for sustainability education in elementary schools (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Order No. MR91764) This thesis comes from a woman who was preparing to become an elementary teacher in Ontario, Canada, and her wishes for the school system there. She writes from more of a personal side almost as if it is her thoughts in a diary with rhetorical questions and not a lot of research to back up any of her opinions, therefore, I don’t think this source will be helpful for this topic. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

Leon Villasmil, I. (2018). Promoting Environmentally Responsible Behaviors in Public Elementary Schools’ Children. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

This author studied Title I elementary schools and the student’s knowledge on environmentally responsible behaviors (ERBs). She distributed a paper questionnaire to 38 fifth graders and the results showed that overall students do not have a significant knowledge on the environment, but they were willing to participate in practicing ERBs. Her solution was to design a low-cost program that be implemented into Title I schools while not adding a significant amount of work for the teachers. She touches on the whole

32 school sustainability framework from Bar, 2014 and also how age plays a factor into these studies.

Online magazine article Cleaver, S. (2019). Hands-on is minds-on. Scholastic Teacher. Retrieved from http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3751901 This article showed the relationship between kids and hands on activites. The research

by Cindy Middendorf and Judy Dodge, it is proven that children learn more by using their hands.

Phillips, A. (2019, January). Children and the environment: Why it’s important to them young. EThe Environmental Magazine. Retrieved from https://emagazine.com/children-and-theenvironment/ This article talks about the importance of teaching environmental habits at a young age.

Online newspaper article Abdelbary, M. (2017, August 9). Learning in motion: bring movement back to the classroom.

Education Week Teacher, First Person. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2017/08/08/learning-in-motion-bring-movementback-to.html This article showed that children who are more active exhibit better focus, faster cognitive processing, and more successful memory retention than kids who spend the day sitting still. Keeping the body active promotes mental clarity by increasing blood flow to the brain, making activity vital to both learning and physical and neurological health.

Therefore, children learn better by getting up and moving.

Goodwin College. (2018, December 17). How hands-on learning benefits children of all ages.

Goodwin College, ENEWS. Retrieved from https://www.goodwin.edu/enews/benefits-ofhands-on-learning/ This article talked about how hands-on, explorative approach empowers children’s imaginations, builds their confidence, and motivates them to take more interest in their own education. Experiential learning environments provide endless hands-on learning benefits for children of all ages. Research has shown that students of all ages learn better when they are actively engaged in their learning journey.

Reports Anderson, M. (2017). For earth day, here’s how americans view environmental issues.

Retrieved from Pew Research Center website: https://www.pewresearch.org/facttank/2017/04/20/for-earth-day-heres-how-americans-view-environmental-issues/ This report talked about how people are more worried than every about climate change and the negative environmental effects on the Earth.

33 Baker, L., & Bernstein, H. (2012). The impact of school buildings on student health and performance. The Center for Green Schools. (Report). Retrieved from https://www.centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resourcefiles/McGrawHill_ImpactOnHealth.pdf This report talks about the role a building can have in student learning. It touches on areas like acoustics, indoor air quality, daylight/vision, thermal comfort, and movement.

Although these mostly focus on the human learning factors, a couple of the factors are still relevant to sustainability and environmental education.

Barr, S., Cross, J., & Dunbar, B. (2014). The whole-school sustainability framework. Institute for the Built Environment, Colorado State University. (Report). Retrieved from http://centerforgreenschools.org/sites/default/files/resource-files/WholeSchool_Sustainability_Framework.pdf This report is a framework form the Center for Green Schools at USGBC on how to make schools teach environmental education through the organizational culture, physical place, and through educational programs. The three aspirational goals for this framework are to have zero environmental footprint in energy, water, waste and carbon, an effect on user’s health and performance, and 100% of graduates showing environmental literacy. It then breaks down each category into three ways that each can be done.

Barr, S., Leigh, K., & Dunbar, B., (2011). Green schools that teach: Whole-School Sustainability (Report). Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Retrieved from http://www.carlsonstudio.org/hubfs/Green_School_That_Teach.pdf Five schools that are certified greed schools are studied to discover the effectiveness of promoting a whole school sustainability framework and an outline of the best practices.

Both facility design and curriculum were looked at throughout the process and it found that both of these along with hands on learning opportunities were vital for a successful program.

Braus, J. & Wood, D. (1997). Environmental education in the schools: Creating a program that works! (Manual No. M0044). Retrieved from the Peace Corps website: https://files.peacecorps.gov/multimedia/pdf/library/M0044.pdf This report focuses on talking about schools that have been successful with environmental education efforts, teaching strategies, funding, evaluation, and how to develop activities based on environmental education. This report does not however, how to teach these topics in hopes that people will build their own programs based off of what is best for their school environment. They stress five important objectives: awareness, knowledge, attitudes, skills, and participation. It also breaks down by grade and subject, what types of activities would be appropriate for that age group. Likewise, it mentions different learning styles and how to best help people learn in each category.

Henderson, K. & Tilbury, D. (2004). Whole-school approaches to sustainability: An international review of sustainable school programs. Report of the Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES) for The Department of the Environment and

34 Heritage, Australian Government. Retrieved from http://aries.mq.edu.au/projects/whole_school/files/international_review.pdf This report is about different “Enviroschools” and “Eco-Schools” in countries like New Zealand, China, and Sweden. It features programs in these countries that have won awards for their green schools, and ways that people can funding and budget for these programs. It also touches on ways to get students to participate and how these schools were successful in those areas. It has suggestions for school ground improvements and integrating these lessons into the curriculum. The framework they use for these programs need to touch on these areas: relevant, resourced, reflective, responsive, and reformative. Upon further reading, this source will not be helpful.

Gordon, D. E. (2010). Green schools as high performance learning facilities. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities. Retrieved from http://www.ncef.org/pubs/greenschools.pdf This talks about systems in a building and how they effect a student.

Olson, S., & Kellum, S. (2003) The impact of sustainable buildings on educational achievements in K-12 Schools. (Report). Madison, Wisconsin: Leonardo Academy Inc. Retrieved from http://www.cleanerandgreener.org/download/sustainableschools.pdf This talks about elements of a building that are sustainable and the effects it has on the educational achievements of school aged children. Not only does it talk about the being sustainable in the final product, but also the design, construction, and operation as a whole. 20% or 56 million people in the U.S. spend their days in elementary and high schools, so it is important to consider how the building they are in effects a large amount of our population. Building green schools has been proven to financially beneficial and the saving in energy costs alone make up for any extra money that is needed to build a green school. Two of the main factors of building green that have shown to have a positive effect on student learning are daylight and indoor air quality. It then mentions several case studies with statistics on student improvement with these things.

U.S. Department of Education, International Affairs Office. (2008). Organization of U.S. Education: The school level. Retrieved from: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/schoollevel.doc This document provided me with the federal policy on the age range of elementary school children in the United States.

Website Soil Science Society of America. (2019). Rain gardens and bioswales. Retrieved from https://www.soils.org/discover-soils/soils-in-the-city/green-infrastructure/importantterms/rain-gardens-bioswales This website provided the definition of bioswales.

35

Appendices A. New Ecological Paradigm Scale (NEP)

On a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements: 1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4

5 Strongly Agree

______1. We are approaching the limit of the number of people the earth can support. ______2. Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs. ______3. When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences. ______4. Human ingenuity will ensure that we do NOT make the earth unlivable. ______5. Humans are severely abusing the environment. ______6. The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them. ______7. Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist. ______8. The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrial nations. ______9. Despite our special abilities humans are still subject to the laws of nature. ______10. The so–called ‘‘ecological crisis’’ facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated. ______11. The earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources. ______12. Humans were meant to rule over the rest of nature. ______13. The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset. ______14. Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature works to be able to control it. ______15. If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe.

36 B. New Ecological Paradigm Scale for Children (NEP-C)

On a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements: 1 Strongly Disagree

2

3

4

5 Strongly Agree

______1. Plants and animals have as much right as people to live. ______2. There are too many (or almost too many) people on earth. ______3. People are clever enough to keep from ruining earth. ______4. People must obey the laws of nature. ______5. When people mess with nature it has bad results. ______6. Nature is strong enough to handle the bad effects of our modern lifestyles. ______7. People are supposed to rule over the rest of nature. ______8. People are treating nature badly. ______9. People will someday know enough about how nature works to be able to control it. ______10. If things don’t change, we will have a big disaster in the environment soon.