Author
Listed:
- Paweena Phumdandin
- Prayoon Wongchantra
Abstract
The purposes of this research were to investigate the efficiency of environmental teaching using Creativity–Based Learning (CBL), to compare the environmental knowledge, the attitudes towards environmental conservation and the environmental problem-solving thinking ability of students before and after learning and to compare the environmental knowledge, attitude towards environmental conservation and the environmental problem-solving thinking ability of students of different genders and faculties after learning. The sample were 52 undergraduate students studying at Rajabhat Mahasarakham University and enrolling in the Natural Resources and Environmental Management in Thai Course. They were selected by a purposive sampling method. The research instruments were 7 lesson plans on the environmental teaching based on CBL, the environmental knowledge test, the environmental conservation attitude assessment and the environmental problem-solving thinking ability assessment. The statistics for data analysis were frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation, t-test, F-test (One-Way MANOVA, One-Way MANCOVA and Univariate Test) were also employed for the hypothesis test.The study results were as the efficiency of the environmental teaching using CBL was 80.90 /82.28, which was higher than the set criteria of 80/80, the mean scores of the students on the environmental knowledge, the attitudes towards environmental conservation, and after the studying, the environmental problem-solving thinking ability were significantly higher than those of before studying at the .05 level, the environmental knowledge, the attitudes towards environmental conservation, and the environmental problem-solving thinking ability of the students of different genders were not different (p > .05) and the environmental knowledge of the students of different faculties was significantly different at the .05 level. However, their attitudes towards environmental conservation and environmental problem-solving thinking ability were not different (p > .05).Â
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:jfr:ijhe11:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:1. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.