Relationship between Ecology Fieldwork and Student Attitudes toward Environmental ProtectionR. Fernández Manzanal,1L.M. Rodríguez Barreiro,2M. Casal Jiménez31Departamento de Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales, University of Zaragoza,50009 Zaragoza, Spain2Centro de Profesores y de Recursos “Zaragoza I”, Spain3Departamento de Ecología, University of Santiago de Compostela, SpainReceived 28 January 1997; revised 11 May 1998; accepted 23 June 1998Abstract: This article is a summary of research carried out on Spanish secondary school students 14–16 years of age, with the intention of finding out what contributions fieldwork makes toward the under-standing of concepts and principles of ecology, and also to ascertain the effects of fieldwork on the de-fense of the studied ecosystem. Before further research was conducted, an exploratory study was carriedout consisting of an initial diagnosis of the pupils’ ideas; fieldwork materials were prepared and an ecol-ogy unit for the study of a freshwater ecosystem was designed, along with evaluation instruments. The ex-perimental design was given shape thanks to work done with two groups of students on whom a more ex-haustive study was performed. The independent variable consisted of a field trip; the dependent variablewas the learning of ecological concepts and their application to the assessment of an environmental prob-lem. The study combined qualitative and quantitative research methods. A result of the research work wasthe conclusion that fieldwork helps clarify ecological concepts and intervenes directly in the developmentof more favorable attitudes toward the defense of the ecosystem. Both components are seen when makingvalid judgments for the resolution of problems which negatively affect the ecosystem and for showing theway toward the type of actions and solutions which should be adopted. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.J Res Sci Teach 36: 431–453, 1999.In the last few years, an increasing interest in environmental education has run parallel tothe growing degradation of ecosystems and a growth of information about environmental af-fairs. Environmental problems are no longer unique to one zone of the planet or, for that mat-ter, one particular nation. Thus, environmental education is becoming an integral part of the ed-ucation of any country’s youth. In Agenda 21 (United Nations, 1992), an agreement was madebetween nations regarding the contribution of environmental education in defense of the envi-ronment. It also reaffirmed that an understanding of the environment has never been more im-portant. The response to the need for environmental education (EE) can be seen in the curricu-lar design for education in Spain, as well as in other countries.JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 36, NO. 4, PP. 431–453 (1999)© 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0022-4308/99/040431-23Correspondence to: R.F. ManzanalThe historical beginnings of the involvement of EE educators include nature studies andrural studies, both popular in the United Kingdom in the first years of this century, along withthe development of “open air education” (Oswald, 1971). Several authors (Lucas, 1980; Gay-ford, 1994) have identified three perspectives in EE: education about the environment, in whichstudents acquire a basic knowledge of and understanding about the environment; education inor through the environment, in which the environment is used as a vehicle for the developmentof knowledge in many subject areas; and education for the environment, in which pupils ex-plore and develop their own attitudes toward the environment.The global nature of environmental interaction and its complexities led to the study of thoseenvironmental questions which would help create a change in the behavior and attitude towardthe environment—that is to say, to train people to contribute for the care of the environment.These three elements (about, through, and for), however, can be seen as interrelated, althoughtheir identification has paralleled the meaning of EE.This article is situated in the area of education through the study of the environment, theobjective of which is to give pupils a series of valid principles to use when they come to makedecisions for the defense of the environment.Some research work which has served as a most immediate reference is related to the influ-ence of environmental studies on attitudes toward the environment. Others make reference to theimportance of field trips for learning. The studies by Amstrong and Impara (1991), Hart (1978),Kinsey and Wheatley (1984), Lisowski and Disinger (1991), Orion and Hofstein (1991, 1994),and Yount and Horton (1992) concentrate on analyses which are to a certain extent similar to thisone, although the experimental designs are diverse. Therefore, it is not possible to draw strict par-allels between the conclusions drawn. The ages of the students involved, the developed curricu-lum, and the time spent on research are also different. Thus, Hart (1978) demonstrated that “ecol-ogy comprehension, not environmental information level, was the best predictor, among variablesconsidered, of environmental attitude” (p. 76). Lisowski and Disinger (1991) showed which con-cepts of ecology were effectively learned with a designed field trip. On the other hand, Armstrongand Impara (1991) pointed out that “tremendous differences in knowledge and attitudes underthese naturalistic settings were not expected” (p. 39). These authors also indicated that “sometopics are value sensitive and can be expected to affect attitudes more than topics that are lessvalue sensitive” (p. 40). For their part, Kinsey and Whitley (1984) concluded that “courses in en-vironmental studies do not affect one’s attitude toward environmental issues” (p. 682). Howev-er, they demonstrated that the students did show significant increases in defensibility (the amountof supporting evidence used in an attitude decision). Yount and Horton (1992) indicated “that stu-dents with higher levels of cognitive reasoning were more likely to use knowledge from an en-vironmental studies course in a subsequent attitude decision” (p. 1075).Although it is difficult to define the meaning of attitude, Shrigley and Koballa (1992) con-sidered research on attitude in learning sciences to have reached an impasse. We feel that threecomponents form what could be defined as attitude: a cognitive component, an affective com-ponent and what gives