California State University, San Bernardino California State University, San Bernardino
CSUSB ScholarWorks CSUSB ScholarWorks
Theses Digitization Project John M. Pfau Library
2008
Proposed activities for an enrivonmental education summer Proposed activities for an enrivonmental education summer
camp program camp program
Caitlin Joan Farr
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project
Part of the Education Commons, and the Environmental Studies Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Farr, Caitlin Joan, "Proposed activities for an enrivonmental education summer camp program" (2008).
Theses Digitization Project
. 3461.
https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/3461
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Theses Digitization Project by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks.
For more information, please contact [email protected].
PROPOSED
ACTIVITIES
FOR
AN
ENVIRONMENTAL
EDUCATION
SUMMER
CAMP
PROGRAM
A
Project
Presented
to
the
Faculty
of
California
State
University,
San
Bernardino
In
Partial
Fulfillment
of
the
Requirements
for
the
Degree
Master
of
Arts
in
Education
:
Environmental
Education
by
Caitlin
Joan
Farr
June
2008
PROPOSED
ACTIVITIES
FOR
AN
ENVIRONMENTAL
EDUCATION
SUMMER
CAMP
PROGRAM
A
Project
Presented
to
the
Faculty
of
California
State
University,
San
Bernardino
by
Caitlin
Joan
Farr
June
2008
Approved
by:
ABSTRACT
A
program
for
a
one-week,
residential
environmental
education
summer
camp
for
campers
aged
12-15
years,
for
a
site
in
Idyllwild,
California
was
developed.
Curriculum
was
selected
from
several
well-known
environmental
education
guides
using
the
environmental
education
goals
identified
by
Hungerford
and
Volk
(2005)
as
the
criteria,
as
well
as
some
specific
lessons
created.
Lessons
were
correlated
to
California
State
Standards
in
science.
This
residential
program
provides
a
constructivist
approach
to
environmental
education
using
hands-on
lessons
and
activities
with
the
objectives
of
increasing
camper
environmental
sensitivity
and
environmental
knowledge,
comfort
in
the
out-of-doors,
and
awareness
of
their
surroundings.
The
evaluation
of
student
journals
will
help
to
determine
whether
or
not
the
program
objectives
were
met
.
iii
DEDICATION
This
is
dedicated
to
all
those
people
who
have
supported
me
throughout
this
process.
To
my
parents,
for
without
them
this
would
not
be
possible,
to
Mike
who
cheered
me
on
every
step
of
the
way,
and
to
Dr.
Stoner
who
continually
read
and
re-read
this
project,
encouraged
me
to
push
myself
further
and
has
been
a
continual
source
of
inspiration
in
the
field.
Thank
you.
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
.................................................
iii
CHAPTER
ONE:
INTRODUCTION
...............................
1
CHAPTER
TWO:
REVIEW
OF
THE
LITERATURE
f
Introduction
.......................................
6
Definitions
of
Environmental
Education
...........
6
Understanding
Outdoor
Education
...................
10
Benefits
of
Residential
Environmental
Education
...........................................
13
Constructivism
.....................................
20
Curriculum
Guides
Reviewed
........................
'24
Project
Learning
Tree:
Pre
K-8
Activity
Guide
.........................................
25
Project
WILD
..................................
25
Sharing
Nature
with
Children
................
26
Ranger
Rick's
Nature
Scope
..................
27
Curriculum
Guides
for
Application
and
Action
Lessons
.............................................
27
Summary
.............................................
2
9
CHAPTER
THREE:
DESIGN
OF
PROJECT
.......................
30
Community
Service
Lesson
Plan
.....................
33
Program
Operation
..................................
37
CHAPTER
FOUR:
CONCLUSION
AND
DISCUSSION
...............
39
APPENDIX
A:
CLASS
DESCRIPTIONS
AND
RESOURCES
..........
42
APPENDIX
B:
LESSON
PLANS
DESIGNED
FOR
OUTDOOR
PROGRAM
.....................................
71
APPENDIX
C:
CAMP
SCHEDULE
.......................
'
......
81
REFERENCES
...............................................
85
iv
to
use
during
outdoor
programming.
Based
on
my
four
years
of
experience
at
the
site,
I
know
that
the
out-of-doors
residential
environment
will
be
supportive
to
this
type
of
program.
This
program
would
differ
greatly
from
the
current
programs
that
are
run
during
the
beginning
of
the
summer
at
Astrocamp.
In
the
current
summer
programs,
campers
take
physical
science
and
astronomy
classes
and
participate
in
activities
such
as
rock
climbing,
robotics,
scuba
and
mountain
biking.
There
is
a
very
small
amount
of
environmental
education
in
the
current
programs.
This
new
environmental
education
program
will
be
marketed
with
the
other
programs,
but
identified
as
a
separate
unique
program
emphasizing
environmental
awareness
and
out-of-doors
exploration.
Campers
who
might
attend
this
program
would
come
from
varied
backgrounds
.
Some
will
have
never
been
to
the
woods
or
experienced
any
type
of
natural
setting.
Others
will
have
been
fortunate
to
have
experienced
a
camping
trip
or
day
hike
with
their
family
or
school.
Either
way,
most
of
the
campers
who
attend
the
program
probably
never
have
been
fully
immersed
in
nature
for
an
extended
duration
of
time.
Due
to
the
price
of
the
experience,
campers
will
3
typically
come
from
upper-middle
class
families
and
mainly
hail
from
California,
Arizona
and
Nevada.
Campers
will
be
away
from
their
families
and
the
constraints
of
living
in
suburban
and
urban
areas.
The
local
mountain
environment
will
be
used
to
teach
about
ecosystems,
sustainability,
and
environmentally
responsible
practices.
Hands-on
activities,
adventure
and
experiential-based
learning
will
be
used
to
promote
excitement
about
the
environment,
as
well
as
environmental
sensitivity.
Campers
will
be
guided
through
activities
by
qualified
instructional
staff.
Simple
activities
such
as
icebreaker
games
will
begin
the
program,
thus
allowing
the
campers
to
feel
comfortable
in
their
surroundings.
Structured
classes
will
then
be
offered
during
the
day
with
campers
having
some
required
classes
and
some
electives.
At
night,
campers
will
come
together
as
a
group
to
reflect
on
the
day's
activities.
During
their
experience
they
will
be
given
some
time
to
explore
nature
in
a
structured
yet
independent
way.
Program
evaluation
will
be
done
by
analyzing
student
journals
based
on
prompts
given
during
specified
journaling
time.
Journals
will
be
looked
at
for
evidence
of
meeting
the
program
objectives.
4
In
past
years,
Astrocamp
has
been
empty
of
campers
throughout
much
of
the
month
of
August.
Why
let
this
facility
go
to
waste
when
it
can
be
used
for
an
innovative,
weeklong
environmental
education
program?
As
Madeyski
stated,
"As
natural
space
and
environmental
preservation
become
more
important
to
society,
camps
stand
ready
to
serve
as
ideal
experiential
teaching
centers"
(2000,
p.
28).
This
project
is
driven
by
the
question:
"Does
immersion
in
a
residential
environmental
education
set
of
experiences
in
the
out-of-doors
increase
environmental
awareness?"
5
CHAPTER
TWO
REVIEW
OF
THE
LITERATURE
Introduction
In
designing
an
effective
residential
environmental
education
program,
first
the
definitions
of
environmental
education
are
considered.
Next
the
field
of
outdoor
education
is
reviewed.
Following
this
is
an
exploration
of
the
benefits
of
residential
environmental
education
programs
and
their
impact
on
camper
learning.
Subsequently
research
on
constructivism
is
reviewed
to
provide
a
supportive
learning
theory
within
the
program.
At
the
end
of
each
section,
the
literature
findings
are
applied
to
the
design
of
an
environmental
education
summer
program
for
campers,
aged
12-15
years.
Definitions
of
Environmental
Education
Four
different
definitions
of
environmental
education
are
reviewed
in
this
section.
Each
definition
is
different
and
important
to
the
field
of
environmental
education.
In
1969
William
B.
Stapp
and
his
graduate
students
provided
the
first
definition
of
environmental
education.
Stapp
et
al.
wrote,
"Environmental
education
is
aimed
at
producing
a
citizenry
that
is
knowledgeable
concerning
the
biophysical
environment
and
its
associated
problems,
aware
6
of
how
to
help
solve
these
problems,
and
motivated
to
work
toward
their
solution"
(1969,
p.
31).
Stapp
et
al.
proposed
that
there
are
four
major
objectives
of
environmental
education.
The
first
helps
people
attain
"a
clear
understanding
that
man
is
an
inseparable
part
of
a
system,
consisting
of
man,
culture,
and
the
biophysical
environment,
and
that
man
has
the
ability
to
alter
the
interrelationships
of
this
system"
(1969,
p.
31).
The
second
is
to
help
obtain
"a
broad
understanding
of
the
biophysical
environment,
both
natural
and
man-made,
and
its
role
in
contemporary
society"
(Stapp
et
al.,
1969,
p.
31).
The
third
is
to
gain
"a
fundamental
understanding
of
the
biophysical
environmental
problems
confronting
man,
how
these
problems
can
be
solved,
and
the
responsibility
of
citizens
and
government
to
work
toward
their
solution"
(Stapp
et
al.,
1969,
p.
31).
The
fourth
and
last
objective
that
Stapp
et
al.
believed
citizens
should
acquire
was
"attitudes
of
concern
for
the
quality
of
the
biophysical
environment
which
will
motivate
citizens
to
participate
in
biophysical
environmental
problem
solving"
(1969,
p.
31).
Shortly
after
Stapp
et
al.
introduced
the
first
definition
of
environmental
education,
the
U.S.
Office
of
Education's
Environmental
Education
Act
provided
another
7
definition
of
environmental
education,
stating
that
"environmental
education
means
the
educational
process
dealing
with
man's
relationship
with
his
natural
and
manmade
surroundings,
and
includes
the
relation
of
population,
conservation,
transportation,
technology,
and
urban
and
regional
planning
to
the
total
human
environment"
(in
Disinger,
2005b,
p.
24).
This
definition
is
similar
to
Stapp's
definition,
yet
it
includes
more
specifics
concerning
our
relationship
with
the
environment
.
In
1977,
The
Tbilisi
Declaration,
a
product
of
the
Intergovernmental
Conference
on
Environmental
Education,
defined
environmental
education
as
a
lasting
education
that
is
receptive
to
a
quickly
changing
world.
If
carried
out
properly,
it
should
prepare
individuals
by
giving
them
the
ability
to
understand
problems,
the
skills
to
productively
solve
those
problems
and
instill
in
them
the
sense
of
responsibility
to
positively
change
the
future
for
all
mankind
(Tbilisi
Declaration,
2005,
pp.
13-14).
The
Tbilisi
Declaration
supported
the
following
categories
of
environmental
education
goals:
awareness,
knowledge,
attitudes,
skills
and
participation
(2005,
p.
15).
In
1996,
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
recorded
another
definition
for
environmental
education:
8
Environmental
education
is
a
learning
process
that
increases
people's
knowledge
and
awareness
about
the
environment
and
associated
challenges,
develops
the
necessary
skills
and
expertise
to
address
these
challenges,
and
fosters
attitudes,
motivations,
and
commitments
to
make
informed
decisions
and
take
responsible
action,
(in
Disinger,
2005a,
p.
30)
These
definitions
encompass
many
of
the
same
aspects
of
environmental
education.
Though
all
of
the
definitions
build
upon
each
other,
it
is
important
to
identify
related
themes
throughout
these
definitions.
The
following
three
themes
were
chosen
as
the
focus
of
environmental
education
throughout
the
project.
First
is
a
basic
knowledge
of
the
environment.
In
order
for
humans
to
understand
environmental
problems
in
an
effort
toward
forming
solutions,
they
must
obtain
a
general
knowledge
of
the
environment,
its
parts,
functions
and
limits.
The
second
theme
is
awareness.
We
as
humans
need
to
be
aware
of
our
relationship
with
the
environment.
We
need
to
understand
that
what
we
do
in
our
everyday
lives
can
have
a
drastic
effect
on
the
environment.
Thirdly,
environmental
education
is
aimed
at
giving
people
the
skills
and
abilities
to
work
on
environmental
problems
so
that
in
the
future
we
will
be
able
to
lessen
our
impact
on
the
Earth.
9
The
acquisition
of
knowledge,
awareness
and
skills
are
all
present
in
the
above
definitions.
It
is
these
three
themes
of
environmental
education
on
which
my
project
focuses.
Given
the
four
definitions
above,
environmental
education
for
this
project
is
defined
as
education
designed
to
help
understand
the
connections
between
humans
and
the
environment,
as
well
as
ways
to
improve
these
connections.
Understanding
Outdoor
Education
There
are
many
different
definitions
and
ideas
behind
outdoor
education.
The
following
thoughts
from
various
professionals
in
the
field
provide
guidance
for
interpreting
outdoor
education.
This
is
intended
as
an
introduction
to
outdoor
education
and
the
definitions
that
will
be
used
as
a
basis
for
the
project.
In
1958,
Donaldson
and
Donaldson
defined
outdoor
education
as
"education
in,
about
and
for
the
outdoors"
(1958,
p.
63).
In
1986,
Priest,
stated
that
outdoor
education
is
"an
experiential
process
of
learning
by
doing,
which
takes
place
primarily
through
exposure
to
the
out-of-doors"
(p.
13).
According
to
Stoner,
Clymire
and
Helgeson,
1989,
in
the
California
Outdoor
School
Curriculum
Guide,
outdoor
education
is
defined
as
"the
10
important
facet
of
environmental
education
that
allows
children
a
unique,
firsthand
learning
opportunity
in
the
out-of
doors"
(1989,
p.
6).
In
an
article
by
Disinger,
he
quoted
Swan
by
stating
that
outdoor
education
is
"the
use
of
resources
outside
the
classroom
for
educational
purposes"
(2005a,
p.
19).
Although
many
different
definitions
of
outdoor
education
exist,
one
similar
theme
seems
to
be
incorporated
into
all
of
the
definitions:
outdoor
education
must
take
place
in
the
out-of-doors
.
Adkins
and
Simmons
stated
that
"outdoor
education
is
a
direct
antecedent
of
environmental
education"
(2002,
p.
2).
Adkins
and
Simmons
believed
that
when
these
two
fields
are
combined,
that
"strong
and
lasting
lessons
take
shape"
(2002,
p.
2).
In
addition
to
the
above
definitions,
Ford
(1986)
stated
that
outdoor
education
was
based
on
four
premises.
These
premises
dovetail
with
the
objectives
of
environmental
education
that
were
given
by
Stapp
et
al.
(1969).
The
first
is
to
teach
respect
for
the
land.
The
second
is
to
give
people
the
knowledge
necessary
for
people
to
make
careful
choices
concerning
their
"actions
on
the
environment,
culture
and
humanity"
(p.
3).
The
third
is
to
give
people
the
knowledge
to
leisurely
enjoy
the
out-of-doors
.
The
fourth
is
to
allow
people
to
11
understand
that
outdoor
education
is
a
lifetime
education
and
does
not
just
consist
of
a
two-day
trip
to
a
national
park
(1986).
Ford
further
stated
that:
All
ages,
abilities,
socio-economic
sectors
—
all
people,
in
short
—
can
benefit
from
outdoor
education
...
not
only
the
learner,
but
also
society.
The
informed
voter
and
citizen
can
make
a
bigger
impact
on
social
issues
involving
natural
resources
if
there
has
been
careful
education.
(1986,
p.
3)
According
to
Stoner,
Clymire
and
Helgeson,
"the
value
of
outdoor
education
is
most
clearly
portrayed
through
scenes
of
a
desired
tomorrow.
The
environmental
actions
taken
by
tomorrow's
adults
will
be
patterned
on
the
knowledge,
emotions,
and
skills
developed
personally
during
youth"
(1989,
p.
29).
From
the
above
definitions
and
ideas
concerning
outdoor
education,
one
can
clearly
see
outdoor
education
is
unique
in
that
it
gives
people
an
opportunity
to
learn
about
the
world
in
an
out-of-doors
setting.
A
quality
outdoor
education
program,
as
the
one
proposed
in
my
project,
contains
opportunities
for
students
to
become
respectful
of
the
out-of-doors,
supplement
their
own
12
classroom
learning,
and
gain
knowledge
concerning
the
environment
.
Benefits
of
Residential
Environmental
Education
Residential
environmental
education
takes
place
during
the
school
year
at
what
is
known
as
a
resident
outdoor
school
and
during
the
summer
at
a
summer
camp.
A
resident
outdoor
school
is
defined
as
"an
experience
in
which
students
remain
at
a
camp
overnight
for
two
or
more
days"
(Millward
in
Shepard
&
Speelman,
1985,
p.
21).
These
schools
are
usually
attended
by
students,
their
classmates,
and
their
teachers
as
part
of
the
regular
school
year.
More
research
has
been
done
concerning
residential
environmental
education
programs
for
children
attending
as
part
of
a
regular
school
year
program
than
has
been
done
on
residential
environmental
summer
camp
programs.
Therefore,
the
effectiveness
of
the
residential
portion
of
school
programs
for
environmental
education
was
looked
at
and
applied
to
a
summer
camp
setting.
In
the
following
review
of
literature,
four
studies
are
reviewed
that
considered
the
environmentally
related
benefits
of
residential
environmental
education.
One
study
done
in
1994
by
Dresner
and
Gill
looked
at
the
Wolf
Creek
Nature
Camp,
a
two-week
summer
residential
13
environmental
education
program
in
the
Redwood
National
Park.
The
goal
of
the
Wolf
Creek
Nature
Camp
was
to
help
children
become
environmentally
responsible
citizens
by
creating
a
program
that
"integrates
awareness
of
the
natural
environment,
knowledge
of
environmental
concepts
and
issues,
and
actions
on
environmental
problems"
(1994,
p.
1).
Twenty-eight
campers,
aged
10-13
years,
attended
the
camp
over
two
consecutive
summers,
1991
and
1992.
All
campers
each
summer
were
given
pretest
surveys
before
they
arrived
at
camp
and
posttest
surveys
six
weeks
after
the
program
ended
each
summer.
Participant
experience
was
recorded
by
students
in
their
personal
journals.
Activities
at
the
camp
included
classes
that
focused
on
"environmental
awareness,
knowledge
of
ecosystems,
and
skills
in
resolving
environmental
issues"
(Dresner
&
Gill,
1994,
p.
4).
Activities
focused
around
naturalist
activities,
hiking,
bird
watching,
and
recycling,
energy
and
water
themes.
Dresner
and
Gill
(1994)
discussed
the
importance
of
being
away
from
the
pressures
of
the
home/school
environment
as
a
defining
factor
in
a
camper's
experience.
They
perceived
that
the
scenic
location
of
a
residential
environmental
camp
gave
children
a
greater
opportunity
to
gain
environmental
sensitivity.
14
Dresner
and
Gill
stated
that
there
was
a
considerable
change
in
self-reported
student
behavior
in
communicating
concern
over
environmental
problems
to
others.
The
authors
noted
a
self-reported
increase
in
excitement
over
nature
as
well
as
a
greater
interest
in
the
environment
once
back
at
school
(1994).
Results
of
the
Dresner
and
Gill
study
indicated
that
all
campers
were
more
relaxed'in
natural
settings
than
prior
to
the
camp.
A
large
number
of
students
showed
increased
environmentally
responsible
behavior
once
they
returned
home
(1994).
Five
parents
reported
that
they
believed
their
child
had
talked
to
others
about
environmental
issues
after
attending
residential
camp
and
tried
to
inspire
them
to
take
environmental
action
(Dresner
&
Gill,
1994).
In
1985,
a
study
done
by
Shepard
and
Speelman
investigated
eight
residential
sessions
at
4-H
Camp
Whitewood
in
Windsor,
Ohio.
In
total,
there
were
613
campers,
aged
9-14,
who
participated
in
the
study,
with
208
of
those
campers
in
the
control
group.
The
campers
who
were
in
the
experimental
group
were
those
who
chose
outdoor
education
as
a
specialization
during
their
three-day
or
five-day
session.
15
One-half
of
the
campers
from
both
groups
were
given
a
pretest
at
the
beginning
of
the
session
and
all
of
the
campers
were
given
a
posttest
immediately
following
the
session.
During
the
camp,
campers
took
classes
that
focused
on
environmental
awareness
and
general
ecology
(Shepard
&
Speelman,
1985).
Survey
data
were
analyzed
using
a
Likert
scale
(Shepard
&
Speelman,
1985,
p.
22).
Considerable
changes
in
scores
from
the
pretest
to
the
posttest
were
present
in
areas
of
forest
management
and
observing
wildflowers.
These
were
two
of
sixteen
identified
areas.
The
authors
suggested
that
this
could
"suggest
a
trend
toward
positive
change
in
attitude
concerning
the
conservation
of
natural
resources"
(Shepard
&
Speelman,
1985,
p.
22).
Shepard
and
Speelman
also
suggested
that
a
program
of
at
least
five
days
in
length
seemed
"to
have
a
more
positive
effect
on
environmental
attitude
development"
(1985,
p.
22).
In
2006,
Knapp
and
Benton
studied
the
recollections
of
information
and
emotions
one
year
after
completing
a
residential
environmental
education
program.
The
study
was
done
on
a
fifth-grade
class
consisting
of
33
students
ages
10-11
years,
from
a
school
in
Idaho.
The
class
attended
a
five-day
residential
environmental
education
program
in
Yellowstone
National
Park
that
focused
on
hands-on
16
interactive
programs
in
water
ecology
and
forest
management.
One
year
after
the
program,
10
students
were
randomly
called
by
phone
and
interviewed.
The
interview
questions
were
open-ended
and
allowed
the
children
to
talk
about
their
experiences
at
the
residential
site
(Knapp
&
Benton,
2006).
According
to
the
Knapp
and
Benton
(2006),
all
of
the
students
were
still
able
to
vividly
recall
much
information
related
to
the
learned
content
at
the
site
one
year
prior.
Not
only
did
they
remember
the
action,
for
example
a
game
of
camouflage,
all
of
the
students
were
able
to
explain
the
environmental
message
involved
with
the
game.
In
the
evaluation
of
student
answers,
they
suggested
that
this
residential
experience
allowed
students
to
not
only
store
information
in
the
form
or
facts,
but
rather
process
the
information
into
a
"conceptual
representation
or
knowing"
(Knapp
&
Benton,
2006,
p.
173).
In
another
study
done
in
1986
by
Jordan,
Hungerford,
and
Tomera,
the
environmentally
responsible
behaviors
of
high-school
students
were
considered
before
and
after
a
six-day
residential
environmental
camp.
The
study
took
place
at
the
Touch
of
Nature
Environmental
Center
at
Southern
Illinois
University
in
Carbondale,
Illinois.
17
Sixty-two
high-school-
students
attending
the
residential
camp
were
divided
into
six
groups.
Three
of
the
groups
took
classes
on
environmental
issues,
stressing
mainly
awareness.
The
other
three
groups
also
took
classes
on
environmental
issues
but
focused
on
awareness
as
well
as
action
strategies.
All
of
the
classes
took
place
in
the
out-of-doors
and
focused
on
topics
including
recreation
and
resource
management
ecology
and
environmental
issues
(1986).
Pre
and
posttests
were
given
to
the
students
in
the
study.
The
results
showed
that
the
knowledge
level
of
students
in
the
environmental
issues
groups
did
not
increase
after
the
study.
In
the
groups
where
environmental
issues
and
actions
were
taught,
students
showed
an
increase
in
environmental
actions
after
the
study.
According
to
the
authors,
these
results
support
the
idea
that
just
giving
people
information
about
environmental
problems
is
not
enough;
rather
people
need
knowledge
of
action
strategies
in
order
to
help
solve
environmental
problems
(Jordan,
Hungerford,
&
Tomera,
1986)
As
for
the
residential
aspect
of
the
'study,
the
researchers
Jordan,
Hungerford,
and
Tomera
stated,
"A
residential
EE
program
may
be
a
good
setting
in
which
to
18
provide
those
first-hand
experiences
which
can
help
motivate
students
to
become
involved
and
participate
in
those
actions
of
which
they
were
already
aware"
(1986,
p.
20).
They
also
acknowledged
that
a
residential
camp
situation
could
offer
campers
a
chance
to
incorporate
action
strategies
into
their
own
daily
lie
and
have
positive
environmental
behavior
modeled
by
instructors
and
or
counselors.
Hammerman,
the
editor
of
Fifty
Years
of
Resident
Outdoor
Education
:
1930-1980,
stated
that
"the
impact
of
resident
outdoor
education
is
indisputable"
(1980,
p.
89).
He
went
on
to
state
that
"environmental
education
stands
not
along,
not
beside,
but
upon
the
shoulders
of
resident
outdoor
education"
(Hammerman,
1980,
p.
89).
He
concluded
that
by
allowing
children
to
live
at
the
residential
site
where
they
learn
about
their
surrounding
environment,
they
become
immersed
in
the
environment,
eventually
learning
to
respect
that
environment
and
draw
from
it,
important
environmentally
sensitive
behaviors.
From
the
above
studies
one
can
conclude
that
students
who
attend
summer
residential
environmental
camp
programs
and/or
environmentally
focused
resident
outdoor
schools
experience
an
increased
interest
in
the
environment
from
their
time
at
the
specific
site.
Environmental
education
19
that
takes
place
in
a
residential
school
or
camp
provides
children
with
unique
experiences
that
help
to
develop
positive
attitudes
and
respect
for
the
environment.
Children
often
show
greater
environmentally
responsible
behavior
once
they
return
home
and
many
also
have
a
change
in
attitude
concerning
environmental
issues.
At
sites
where
action
strategies
were
taught,
students
showed
an
increase
in
environmental
actions
after
the
program.
Residential
sites
may
also
help
students
to
retain
and
process
information
due
to
the
comprehensive
environment
in
which
they
receive
the
information.
As
shown
above,
the
environmental
residential
program
proposed
at
Astrocamp
may
enable
students
to
become
comfortable
and
aware
of
their
surroundings
in
the
out-of-doors,
knowledgeable
of
the
nearby
ecosystems,
and
inspired
to
take
action
in
their
own
lives,
ultimately
increasing
their
environmental
sensitivity.
Constructivism
In
a
traditional
classroom
or
learning
situations,
the
teacher
stands
in
front
of
the
class,
lectures
about
a
topic
and
then
gives
the
students
a
way
of
showing
their
newly
learned
knowledge
using
a
worksheet
or
a
test.
A
different
type
of
learning
occurs
with
a
constructivist
20
approach.
In
constructivism,
"knowledge
is
actively
constructed
by
the
cognizing
subject,
not
passively
received
from
the
environment"
(Lerman
in
Klein
and
Merritt,
1994,
p.
15).
"Constructivist
learning
theories
state
that
learners
construct
knowledge
based
on
their
own
personal
experiences
rather
than
passively
absorbing
it"
(Garmston
&
Wellman
in
DiEnno
&
Hilton,
2005,
p.
15)
.
Klein
and
Merritt
analyzed
environmental
education
materials
and
how
they
fit
into
a
constructivist
curriculum.
They
stated
that
there
are
four
main
components
in
a
successful
constructivist
lesson.
These
are:
"(a)
the
introduction
of
a
real
life
problem
by
the
teacher
for
the
students
to
resolve,
(b)
student-centered
instruction
facilitated
by
the
teacher,
(c)
productive
group
interaction
during
the
learning
process,
and
(d)
authentic
assessment
and
demonstration
of
student
progress"
(1994,
p.
16).
Klein
and
Merritt
(1994)
acknowledged
that
even
though
the
idea
of
constructivist
teaching
is
relatively
a
new
idea
in
classroom
teaching,
environmental
educators
have
been
successfully
using
constructivist
strategies
for
a
long
time.
In
2005,
DiEnno
and
Hilton
did
a
study
with
high
school
students
to
"determine
whether
a
teaching
methodology
based
on
the
constructivist
learning
theory
21
would
be
an
effective
method
for
enhancing
student
retention
of
environmental
material,
engendering
positive
attitudes
toward
the
environment,
and
engaging
students
in
the
learning
process"
(p.
14).
Although
this
study
was
not
done
exclusively
in
an
outdoor
school
setting,
it
supports
the
effectiveness
of
a
constructivist
approach.
Fifty-four
students
from
a
Colorado
high-school
participated
in
the
week-long
study
by
DiEnno
and
Hilton.
The
students
were
split
up
into
a
constructivist
group
and
a
traditional
group.
The
constructivist
group
consisted
of
36
students
in
grades
10-12.
The
traditional
group
consisted
of
18
students
in
grades
10-12.
A
pretest
was
given
to
all
the
students
to
"measure
knowledge
levels,
environmental
attitudes,
and
demographic
information"
(2005,
p.
17).
The
students
in
the
constructivist
group
were
taught
using
constructivist
teaching
methods.
Some
of
their
teaching
was
done
outside
in
a
nature
preserve.
The
teacher
began