IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mth/jeijnl/v6y2020i2p398413.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Examination of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards the National Park in Their Environment: The Isparta, Denizli Example

Author

Listed:
  • Aytaç KarakaÅŸ
  • Hasan Genç

Abstract

Environmental education in national parks is equivalent to an open and permanent education process in which individuals and communities become aware of their natural environment and gain a critical and sensitive attitude towards it and the use of its resources. The aim of this study was to examine the attitudes of teachers towards national parks who work in schools near different national parks in terms of different variables. As a work of descriptive research, it was conducted with a total of 167 teachers who worked in schools around Kovada Lake National Park, Kızıldağ National Park, and Honaz Mountain National Park. In the study, an attitude scale with a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of 0.83 and consisting of 32 items was used for the national parks. The SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences Program) was used to evaluate the data obtained. A T-test and a one-way ANOVA test were used to analyze the data. According to the results obtained, teachers’ attitudes towards the national park did not show a significant difference in terms of their gender, their tenure, the branches they serve, their purpose of visiting the national park, their opinions on the importance attached to the national park, the different schools near the national park, the national park near the schools they worked in, their purpose in visiting the national park previously while they differed significantly according to whether the teachers had visited the national park before.

Suggested Citation

  • Aytaç KarakaÅŸ & Hasan Genç, 2020. "An Examination of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards the National Park in Their Environment: The Isparta, Denizli Example," Journal of Educational Issues, Macrothink Institute, vol. 6(2), pages 398413-3984, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:mth:jeijnl:v:6:y:2020:i:2:p:398413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jei/article/download/17894/14013
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jei/article/view/17894
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Dietz & Linda Kalof & Paul C. Stern, 2002. "Gender, Values, and Environmentalism," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 353-364, March.
    2. Hilmi Demirkaya & Dilek Erduran Avcı & Hasan Genç & Huriye Deniş Çeliker & Bekir Yıldırım & Didem Gamze Genç & Orhan Ünal & Ülkü Tuğçe Çal, 2020. "An Investigation of Prospective Teachers’ Attitudes Towards National Parks and Views on Ecology-Based Environmental Education," Journal of Educational Issues, Macrothink Institute, vol. 6(2), pages 5986-5986, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Enzo Loner, 2016. "A new way of looking at old things. An application of Guttman errors analysis to the study of environmental concern," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 823-847, March.
    2. Witkowski, Terrence H. & Reddy, Sabine, 2010. "Antecedents of ethical consumption activities in Germany and the United States," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 8-14.
    3. Measham, Thomas G. & Zhang, Airong, 2019. "Social licence, gender and mining: Moral conviction and perceived economic importance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 363-368.
    4. Umaerus, Patrik & Högvall Nordin, Maria & Lidestav, Gun, 2019. "Do female forest owners think and act “greener”?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 52-58.
    5. Morioka, Rika, 2014. "Gender difference in the health risk perception of radiation from Fukushima in Japan: The role of hegemonic masculinity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 105-112.
    6. Stephen C. Whitfield & Eugene A. Rosa & Amy Dan & Thomas Dietz, 2009. "The Future of Nuclear Power: Value Orientations and Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 425-437, March.
    7. Stuart, Alice & Bond, Alan & Franco, Aldina M.A. & Baker, Julia & Gerrard, Chris & Danino, Vittoria & Jones, Kylie, 2023. "Conceptualising social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    8. Ratchaneekorn Dansirichaisawat, 2014. "Discovering Environmental Attitude and Lifestyle Segmentation of Green Consumers: a Conceptual Model for Research," Journal of Social and Development Sciences, AMH International, vol. 5(2), pages 102-110.
    9. Mukherjee, Deep & Rahman, Mohammad Arshad, 2016. "To drill or not to drill? An econometric analysis of US public opinion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 341-351.
    10. Andrea LeFebvre & Veronika Huta, 2021. "Age and Gender Differences in Eudaimonic, Hedonic, and Extrinsic Motivations," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 2299-2321, June.
    11. J. K. Eastman & P. Modi & S. Gordon-Wilson, 2020. "The Impact of Future Time Perspective and Personality on the Sustainable Behaviours of Seniors," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 275-294, June.
    12. Eline Jongmans & Alain Jolibert & Julie Irwin, 2014. "Toujours plus, toujours mieux ? Effet contre-intuitif de l'évaluation des attributs environnementaux du produit par le consommateur," Post-Print halshs-01185784, HAL.
    13. McAuliffe, Sarah & Potts, Jonathan & Canessa, Rosaline & Baily, Brian, 2014. "Establishing attitudes and perceptions of recreational boat users based in the River Hamble Estuary, UK, towards Marine Conservation Zones," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 98-107.
    14. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.
    15. Meyer, Andrew, 2016. "Is unemployment good for the environment?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 18-30.
    16. Michael Luchs & Todd Mooradian, 2012. "Sex, Personality, and Sustainable Consumer Behaviour: Elucidating the Gender Effect," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 127-144, March.
    17. Wadud, Zia & Chintakayala, Phani Kumar, 2019. "Personal Carbon Trading: Trade-off and Complementarity Between In-home and Transport Related Emissions Reduction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 397-408.
    18. Jagadish Thaker & Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2020. "Global Warming Risk Perceptions in India," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(12), pages 2481-2497, December.
    19. Junyi Shen & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2007. "The Socioeconomic Determinants of Individual Environmental Concern: Evidence from Shanghai Data," OSIPP Discussion Paper 07E003, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
    20. Taghikhah, Firouzeh Rosa & Taghikhah, Masoud & Marshall, Jonathan Paul & Voinov, Alexey, 2024. "Navigating the community renewable energy landscape: An analytics-driven policy formulation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 362(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mth:jeijnl:v:6:y:2020:i:2:p:398413. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Technical Support Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://jei.macrothink.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.