Identifying areas and approaches for improving evaluation processes in environmental education in the United States of America

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Environmental Education Pub Date : 2022-09-22 DOI:10.1080/00958964.2022.2122918
K. C. Anderson, M. Stern, R. B. Powell
{"title":"Identifying areas and approaches for improving evaluation processes in environmental education in the United States of America","authors":"K. C. Anderson, M. Stern, R. B. Powell","doi":"10.1080/00958964.2022.2122918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Evaluation has not been used to its fullest potential in environmental education (EE). Pressures from external stakeholders can cause organizations to focus on reporting requirements at the expense of conducting evaluations that support programmatic improvement. Understanding practitioners’ satisfaction with their evaluation processes and the drivers of this satisfaction may reveal strategies for improving evaluation processes in the field of EE. We administered an online survey to EE practitioners in the United States via email and social media. Our results indicate low satisfaction with evaluation processes overall, but greater satisfaction from organizations engaged in systematic formal evaluation, particularly processes focused on adaptive management and programmatic improvement, when compared to evaluations focused on satisfying external accountabilities or using informal evaluation processes based on nonsystematic observation and reflection. Our results also highlight current gaps in using evaluation for adaptive management and for furthering diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in the field.","PeriodicalId":47893,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Education","volume":"53 1","pages":"290 - 303"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Education","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2022.2122918","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Evaluation has not been used to its fullest potential in environmental education (EE). Pressures from external stakeholders can cause organizations to focus on reporting requirements at the expense of conducting evaluations that support programmatic improvement. Understanding practitioners’ satisfaction with their evaluation processes and the drivers of this satisfaction may reveal strategies for improving evaluation processes in the field of EE. We administered an online survey to EE practitioners in the United States via email and social media. Our results indicate low satisfaction with evaluation processes overall, but greater satisfaction from organizations engaged in systematic formal evaluation, particularly processes focused on adaptive management and programmatic improvement, when compared to evaluations focused on satisfying external accountabilities or using informal evaluation processes based on nonsystematic observation and reflection. Our results also highlight current gaps in using evaluation for adaptive management and for furthering diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in the field.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
确定改进美利坚合众国环境教育评价过程的领域和方法
摘要评价在环境教育中尚未充分发挥其潜力。来自外部利益攸关方的压力可能导致各组织将重点放在报告要求上,而牺牲了进行支持方案改进的评价。了解从业者对其评估过程的满意度以及这种满意度的驱动因素,可以揭示改善EE领域评估过程的策略。我们通过电子邮件和社交媒体对美国的EE从业者进行了一项在线调查。我们的结果表明,总体上对评估过程的满意度较低,但参与系统正式评估的组织,特别是侧重于适应性管理和方案改进的过程,满意度更高,与侧重于满足外部问责或使用基于非系统观察和反思的非正式评价程序的评价相比。我们的研究结果还强调了目前在使用评估进行适应性管理以及促进该领域的多样性、公平性和包容性方面的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
12.90%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Any educator in the environmental field will find The Journal of Environmental Education indispensable. Based on recent research in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, the journal details how best to present environmental issues and how to evaluate programs already in place for primary through university level and adult students. University researchers, park and recreation administrators, and teachers from the United States and abroad provide new analyses of the instruction, theory, methods, and practices of environmental communication and education in peer-reviewed articles. Reviews of the most recent books, textbooks, videos, and other educational materials by experts in the field appear regularly.
期刊最新文献
PTEN loss in glioma cell lines leads to increased extracellular vesicles biogenesis and PD-L1 cargo in a PI3K-dependent manner. Nature as a peace educator: Toward inner peace through learning and being in natural environments Far-right narratives of climate change acceptance and their role in addressing climate skepticism Family matters: intergenerational influences on children’s agricultural literacy Predator free 2050 and pedagogy: Teaching about introduced predators in Aotearoa New Zealand
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1