UNIVERsm MALAYSIA SABAH

BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS

lUDUL: AN EVALUATION ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE SEKOLAH RAKAN ALAN SEKrrAR (SERASI) PROGRAMME IN SABAH, MALAYSIA

IJAZAH: SARlANA SAINS (PENGURUSAN SEKITARAN)

SESIPENGAlIAN: 2005/2006

Saya, SUSAN PUDIN, mengaku membenarkan tesis sarjana ini disimpan di perpustakaan Universiti Malaysia Sabah dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti berikut:

1. Tesis adalah hak milik Universiti Malaysia Sabah. 2. Perpustakaan Universiti Malaysia Sabah dibenarkan membuat salinan

untuk tujuan pengajian saya. 3. Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan

pertukaran antara institusi pengajian tinggi. 4. TIDAK TERHAD.

Penulis: SUSAN PUDIN

Alamat: C-31A, Regency Park 89500 Penampang Sabah

Tarikh: 28 Julai 2008

PERPUSTAKAAN UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SA !4

Disahkan oleh

TANDATANGAN PUSTAKAWAN

Penyelia: Prof. Datin Dr. Ann ~~!Ofn.R_ Tarikh:~

m-Penyelia: Prof. Dr. Vincent Pang I 0-

Tarikh8 t t J ~~

CATATAN: Tesis dimaksudkan sebagai tesis Ijazah Doktor Falsafah dan Sarjana secara penyelidikan atau disertassi bagi pengajian secara kerja khusus dan penyelidikan, atau laporan Projek Sarjana Muda (LPSM).

AN EVALUATION ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE SEKOLAH RAKAN ALAM SEKITAR

(SERASI) PROGRAMME IN SABAH, MALAYSIA

SUSAN PUDIN

PERPUSTAWN UNIVERSlTl M .Y~If\ S.l\8 ~

THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILLMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF

SCIENCE

SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH

2008

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the material in this thesis is my own except for quotations, excerpts, equations, summaries and references, which have been duly acknowledged.

28 July 2008 PERPUSTAKAAN UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SA8/:, :

ii

Susan Pudin PSOS-001-002

CERTIFICATION

filE : AN EVALUATION ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE SEKOLAH RAKAN ALAN SEKrrAR (SERASI) PROGRAMME IN SABAH, MALAYSIA

DEGREE : MASTER OF SCIENCE (ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT)

VIVA DATE : 24th JULY 2008

DECLARED BY

1. PROF. DATIN DR. ANN ANTON SUPERVISOR

2. PROF. DR. VINCENT PANG CO-SUPERVISOR

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to extend my utmost gratitude and appreciation to the Sabah State Government for fully funding my Masters Degree; the Director of the Environment Protection Department, Yang Berbahagia Datuk Eric Juin, Deputy Director, Mr. Yabi Yangkat and the former Head of Extension Division, Mr. William Ahlan for their continuous support in my studies; my Supervisors, Yang Berbahagia Prof. Datin Dr. Ann Anton and Prof. Dr. Vincent Pang for their valuable support, guidance and time; the Ministry of Education Malaysia and Sabah State Education Department for their permission to conduct my research in schools; all principals, teachers and students of schools who have willingly and kindly co-operated in the administration of questionnaires and interviews during the pilot study and main research; and all colleagues and friends who are involved in implementing environmental education in Sabah.

I am forever grateful to my husband, Terence Baduk and two children, Shania Suinani and Tedorik Tonjumal; my parents Edward and Evyline Pudin; my mother-in­law Bethania Sinayun; my siblings Rosa, Grace, Terrance, Pancratius and the late Roland; my brothers- and sisters-in-law Celestina, Flora, Paulinus, Godwin, Roscalia, Fredolen and Maxwell; nieces Trixie Carlena, Trixlynn Charissa, Trinie Claudia, Rachelle and Abigail; nephews Dante, Cyrus, Milton, Carl Tevin, Tobryance, Darren, Torrence, Darrien, Ceddrik and Raenen; and my best friend Caroline Harris for their continuous support, endless patience, understanding and encouragement throughout my studies.

A special thanks to Azima Azmi, Noumie Surugau, Daisy Aloysius, Helen Erut, Carolyn Tay, Juliana Andrew, Emy Hadida Mohd. Noor, Bernadette Joeman, Carolyn Joeman, Bernadette John, Chai Hsieh Nee, Josephine Robert, Jaswinder Kaur Kler, Hjh. Robaiah Hj. Abdul Aziz, Supiah Musah, Sukini Sokimin, Zahrah Yaacob, Ainon Salam, Dena Edmund, Jennifer Lajaip, Linda Pudin, Elsie Wong, Ann Jude, Trecey Tojuka, Joanna Stidi, Lynda Karen Athanasius, Shanty Ripah, Doreen Juhan, Jocelyn Maluda, Cornelea Godon, Tan Hui Shim, Rose John and friends in Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Environment Protection Department and Sabah Environmental Education Network (SEEN). Last but not least, a big thank you to all wonderful cousins, aunties, uncles and friends for being there for me.

I thank God for all of you, and for the meaningful and rewarding experiences during my studies.

iv

ABSTRACf

AN EVALUATION ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE SEKOLAH RAKAN ALAM SEKlTAR(SERASI) PROGRAMME IN SABAH, MALAYSIA

This study evaluated the implementation of SERASI Programme in Sabah in terms of attitude change and outcomes. Evaluation of attitude change focused on three attitude components namely cognitive, affective and behavioural. Intended and unintended outcomes of the programme were also evaluated. The evaluation showed that the implementation of SERASI in the 39 schools had enhanced and improved environmental attitude amongst teachers and students. Collective change of attitude among the teachers and students may have resulted in behaviours that in turn produced positive environmental outcomes. Based on the teachers' years of service, it was found that there was a significant difference in environmental attitude after SERASI implementation. It was also found that there was no significant difference in environmental attitude between teachers who attended environmental education courses and those who did not. The results showed there was no Significant difference in environmental attitude between teachers who teach environment­related subjects and non-environment related subjects, between graduate and non­graduate teachers, and between primary and secondary school teachers. For students, it was found that there was a significant difference in environmental attitude between leaders and non-leaders, and between primary and secondary school students. The results showed that there was a positive correlation between teachers' understanding on SERASI and their environmental attitude. Positive correlations were found among the cognitive, affective and behavioural components of teachers' and students' environmental attitudes. Based on the results, 88.S% of teachers and 90.3% of students responded that their schools' surroundings were more pleasant and cleaner after SERASI was implemented. Therefore, this particular outcome was the most obvious outcome of SERASI in the 39 schools. These findings were concluded by both qualitative and quantitative data analyses. There were other intended and unintended outcomes found in the research. For future research pertaining to the evaluation of SERASI Programme, studies should include more districts and schools, and other aspects of SERASI. The research findings are important to the organisers of SERASI Programme and to other relevant organisations working closely in the field of environmental education in Sabah.

v

ABSTRAK

Kajian ini te/ah meni/ai pe/aksanaan Program SERASI di Sabah dad segi perubahan sikap dan hasi/ pe/aksanaan. Peni/aian perubahan sikap tertumpu kepada tiga komponen sikap iaitu kognitif, afektif dan tingkahlaku. Hasi/-hasi/ pe/aksanaan yang dijangka dan di /uar jangkaan juga dini/ai. Kajian menunjukkan bahawa pelaksanaan SERASI di 39 buah seko/ah te/ah mempertingkatkan dan memperbaiki sikap para guru dan pe/ajar terhadap a/am sekitar. Perubahan sikap bersama di ka/angan guru­guru dan para pe/ajar kemungkinan besar te/ah merubah tingkah/aku mereka dan seterusnya memberikan hasi/ positif dari segi a/am sekitar. Berdasarkan tempoh perkhidmatan para guru, kajian mendapati bahawa terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam sikap terhadap a/am sekitar se/epas SERASI di/aksanakan. 77ada perbezaan signifikan sikap terhadap a/am sekitar antara para guru yang pernah menghadiri kursus pendidikan a/am sekitar dan mereka yang be/um pernah. Kajian juga mendapati bahawa tiada perbezaan signifikan da/am sikap terhadap a/am sekitar antara guru-guru yang mengajar subjek yang berkaitan dengan a/am sekitar dan subjek-subjek lain, antara para guru siswazah dan bukan siswazah serta antara guru­guru sekolah rendah dan menengah. Bagi para pelajar pula, kajian mendapati terdapat perbezaan signifikan da/am sikap terhadap a/am sekitar antara pemimpin dan bukan pemimpin, serta antara para pe/ajar seko/ah rendah dan seko/ah menengah. Kajian mendapati terdapat kore/asi positif antara kefahaman para guru mengenai SERASI dan sikap mereka terhadap a/am sekitar. Kore/asi positif juga didapati antara komponen-komponen kognitif, afektif dan tingkah/aku bagi sikap para guru dan pe/ajar terhadap alam sekitar. Berdasarkan keputusan kajian, 88.5% guru dan 90.3% pe/ajar menyatakan bahawa persekitaran sekolah semakin ceria dan bersih setelah SERASI diperkenalkan. Oleh yang demikian, hasil ini adalah hasil pe/aksanaan SERASI yang paling ketara di 39 buah sekolah yang terlibat. Keputusan ini te/ah dicapai o/eh kedua-dua ana/isa data kua/itatif dan kuantitatif. Hasil-hasil lain yang dijangka dan di /uar jangkaan didapati da/am kajian ini. Kajian yang dikenalpasti yang boleh dija/ankan pada masa akan datang dari segi peni/aian program SERASI dicadang untuk merangkumi lebih banyak daerah dan sekolah serta pelbagai aspek Program SERASL Dapatan kajian ini ada/ah penting kepada penganjur Program SERASI dan organisasi berkaitan yang terlibat secara aktif dalam bidang pendidikan a/am sekitar di Sabah.

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1.1 Objectives of Environmental Education and Actions 2

Table 2.1 Examples of Environmental Education Programmes and 27 Activities

Table 2.2 Difference between Environmental Education and Education 36 for Sustainable Development

Table 3.1 Number of SERASI School Nominations in 2005 48

Table 3.2 Districts were Alphabetically Arranged and Randomly Chosen 49 in the Cluster Sampling

Table 3.3 Reliability Analysis Results for Teachers' Questionnaire 55

Table 3.4 Reliability Analysis Results for Students' Questionnaire 55

Table 3.5 Statistical Tests used to Test Hypotheses 57

Table 4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Teachers 60

Table 4.2 Demographic Characteristics of Students 61

Table 4.3 Result of the Normality Test for Hal 61

Table 4.4 Result of the Normality Test for Ho3 62

Table 4.5 Result of the Normality Test for Ho4 62

Table 4.6 Result of the Normality Test for HaS 62

Table 4.7 Result of the Normality Test for Ho6 63

Table 4.8 Result of the Normality Test for Ho9 63

Table 4.9 Result of the Normality Test for HalO 63

Table 4.10 Result of the Normality Test for Teachers' Teaching Level 64 (Primary and Secondary)

Table 4.11 Result of the normality test for Ho2 64

Table 4.12 Result of the normality test for Ho7 64

Table 4.13 Result of the normality test for Ho8 65

Table 4.14 Result of the normality test for Hall 65

Table 4.15 Results of the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Tests for Teachers and 65 Students

Table 4.16a Results of the Kruskal-Wallis Test for Ho3 for Teachers 66

Table 4.16b Results of the Kruskal-Wallis Test for Ho3 for Teachers 66

Table 4.17 Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for Ho4 for Teachers 67

Table 4.18 Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for HaS for Teachers 67

Table 4.19 Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for Ho6 for Teachers 67

vii

Page

Table 4.20 Environmental Attitude between Primary and Secondary 68 School Teachers

Table 4.21a Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for Ho7 for Students 68

Table 4.21b Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for Ho7 for Students 68

Table 4.22a Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for Ho8 for Students 69

Table 4.22b Results of the Man-Whitney U Test for Ho8 for Students 69

Table 4.23 Outcomes Listed in Teachers' Questionnaire 70

Table 4.24 Outcomes Listed in Students' Questionnaire 72

Table 4.25 Results of the Spearman's Rho Correlation for Ho9 for 77 Teachers

Table 4.26 Results of the Spearman's Rho Correlation For HalO For 78 Teachers

Table 4.27 Results of the Spearman's Rho Correlation for Ho11 for 79 Students

Table 4.28 Principals' Responses on Monitoring Systems 80

Table 4.29 Principal's Responses on Environmental Education in Teaching 80 and Learning

Table 4.30 Principals' Responses on Finance 81

Table 4.31 Principals' Responses on Action Plan for SERASI 81

Table 4.32 A Summary of Results of Quantitative Data Analyses 82

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1 Fishbein and Ajzen's Model of Attitude Change 43

Figure 3.1 Research Conceptual Framework 45

Figure 3.2 Sabah Map Showing the Districts Involved in the Research 50

Figure 3.3 Calculation of Percentage Sampled for Primary School 51 Students

Figure 3.4 Calculation of Percentage Sampled for Secondary School 51 Students

Figure 3.5 Calculation of Percentage Sampled for Teachers 51

Figure 4.1 Percentage of Teachers Who Responded to Agree and 71 Strongly Agree in Part D of the Questionnaire on Outcomes of SERASI

Figure 4.2 Percentage of Students Who Responded to Agree and 73 Strongly Agree in Part C of the Questionnaire on Outcomes of SERASI

Figure 5.1 Model of Attitude Change Based on Research Finding 83

Figure 5.2 A Creative Way to Create Shades in Walkways is shown in this 92 School

Figure 5.3 Various Ways to Beautify a School's Compound 92

Figure 5.4 Compost Heaps Waiting to Mature 93

Figure 5.5 Three-Coloured Recycling Bins 93

Figure 5.6 Various Plants are Planted in the School's Surrounding 94

ix

ABBREVIATIONS

DOE Department of Environment EPD Environment Protection Department ESD Education for Sustainable Development IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural

NGO SEEN SERASI UNEP UNESCO WWF

Resources Non-Governmental Organisation Sabah Environmental Education Network Seko/ah Rakan A/am Sekitar United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation World Wide Fund for Nature

x

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION

CERTIFICATION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

ABBREVIATIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: 1.1

INTRODUCTION Environmental Education

1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

Seko/ah Rakan A/am Sekitar (SERASI) Statement of Problem Scope of Research Research Objective Research Questions Research Hypotheses Significance of Research Operational Definitions

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Environmental Management

2.2.1 Global Outlook 2.2.2 Environmental Management in Malaysia 2.2.3 Environmental Management in Sabah

2.3 Environmental Education 2.3.1 Global Development of Environmental Education 2.3.2 Development of Environmental Education in Malaysia 2.3.3 Environmental Education Initiatives in Sabah

2.4 Environmental Education in Schools 2.5 Education for Sustainable Development 2.6 Programme Evaluation 2.7 Evaluation of Environmental Education Programmes 2.8 Attitude 2.9 Theoretical Frameworks of Attitude Change

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Research Conceptual Framework 3.3 Research Design

xi

Page

ii

iii

iv

v

vi

vii

ix

x

xi

1

1 6 10 12 12 12 13 15 15

18

18 18 18 19 20 21 21 24 26 29 33 36 38 39 41

44

44 44 45

3.4 3.5 3.6

3.7 3.8 3.9

Research Subjects, Sampling Population and Method Negotiation of Access Research Instruments 3.6.1 Questionnaire on SERASI and Environmental Attitude 3.6.2 Interview Pilot Study Results Data Collection Data Analysis 3.9.1 Quantitative Data Analysis 3.9.2 Qualitative Data Analysis

Page 46 52 52 52 54 54 56 56 56 58

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS 59 4.1 Introduction 59 4.2 Results 59

4.2.1 Demographic Characteristics 59 4.2.2 Normality Tests 61 4.2.3 Teachers' and Students Environmental Attitude after 65

SERASI Implementation 4.2.4 Environmental Attitude among teachers after SERASI 66

Implementation 4.2.5 Environmental Attitude after SERASI Implementation 68

among Students 4.2.6 Other Intended Outcomes of SERASI Implementation 69 4.2.7 Correlation between Teachers' Understanding on SERASI 77

and Environmental Attitude 4.2.8 Correlation among the Cognitive Component, Affective 78

Component and Behavioural Component of Teachers' and Students' Environmental Attitude

4.2.9 Principals' Environmental Management 79 4.2.10 Summary of Results of Quantitative Data Analysis 82

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSIONS 83 5.1 Introduction 83 5.2 Issues related to SERASI 84

5.2.1 Improvement in Environmental Attitude 84 5.2.2 Experience and Formal Exposure to Environmental 85

Education 5.2.3 Subjects Taught 86 5.2.4 Academic Level 86 5.2.5 Importance of Commitment and Good Leadership 87 5.2.6 Extra Task or Burden 88 5.2.7 Financial Implications 90 5.2.8 Physical Improvements of Schools 91

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION 95 6.1 Introduction 95 6.2 Summary of Research Findings 95 6.3 Recommendations on Further Research Works 97

xii

Page REFERENCES 99

APPENDIX A: Examples of Environment-Related Courses offered By Universities 104 in Malaysia

APPENDIX B: Letter of Approval from the Ministry of Education and Letter of 106 Approval from the Sabah Education Department

APPENDIX C: Questionnaire For Teachers 108

APPENDIX D: Questionnaire For Students 117

APPENDIX E: Interview Questions For School Administrator 123

APPENDIX F: Interview Questions For Teachers 124

APPENDIX G: Interview Questions For Students 125

APPENDIX H: Text Interviews with Principals or Representatives 126

APPENDIX I: Text Interviews with Teachers 183

APPENDIX 1: Text Interviews with Students 199

APPENDIX K: Results of Teachers' Responses on SERASI Outcomes 203

APPENDIX L: Results of Students' Responses on SERASI Outcomes 204

APPENDIX M: Members of the Sabah Environmental Education Network (SEEN) 205

APPENDIX N: Paper related to SERASI published by Ms. Susan Pudin 206

xiii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

The development of environmental education is not new (Palmer, 1998). The

environmental education movements have evolved over many years throughout the

world. It is used as one of the tools to manage the environment to create an

environmentally responsible society. In the process of environmental education,

individuals obtain understanding of concepts and knowledge of the environment.

They also acquire experience, values, skills and knowledge necessary to form

judgements, to participate in decision-making and to take appropriate actions in

addressing environmental issues and problems. Environmental education is an

instrument to enable participation and learning of various age groups based on a

two-way communication, either formal or informal.

Among the many definitions of environmental education, one of them was

formulated by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources (IUCN) (Palmer, 1998):

the process of recognising values and classifying concepts in order to develop skills and attitudes necessary to understand and appreciate the inter­relatedness among man, his culture and his biophysical surroundings. Environmental education also entails practice in decision-making and self formulating of a code of behaviour about issues concerning environmental quality.

Another definition of environmental education was conceived during the

historic Tbilisi Convention sponsored by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and

Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

in 1977 in Tbilisi. Environmental education was defined as:

a process aimed at developing a world population that is aware of and concerned about the total environment and its associated problems, and

which has knowledge, attitudes, motivations, commitments and skills to work individually and collectively towards solutions of current problems and the prevention of new ones (Sato, 2006).

The participants of the Tbilisi Convention 1977 highlighted that environmental

education stemmed from the reorientation of various disciplines and the

establishment of links between them to facilitate an integrated and comprehensive

perception of environmental issues and to encourage more rational actions to satiSfy

the needs of society (Sato, 2006). The basic objectives of environmental education -

awareness, knowledge, attitudes, skills and participation - identified in the Tbilisi

Declaration 1977 have remained the core mission of environmental education over

the last 30 years or so (Chenrachasit, 2006). The main objectives of environmental

education and their respective actions (Sato, 2006) are summarised in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Objectives of Environmental Education and Actions

Objectives Actions Awareness To help social groups and individuals acquire an

awareness of and sensitivity to the total environment and its allied problems.

Knowledge To help social groups and individuals gain a variety of experience in, and acquire a basic understanding of, the environment and its associated problems.

Attitudes To help social groups and individuals acquire a set of values and feelings of concern for the environment, and the motivation for actively participating in environmental improvement and protection.

Skills To help social groups and individuals acquire the skills for identifying and solving environmental problems.

Participation To provide social groups and individuals with an opportunity to be actively involved at all levels in working towards the resolution of environmental problems.

Source: Sato (2006)

In 1980, a report entitled The World Conservation Strategy published by

IUCN, UNEP and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) contributed to the development

of the concept of environmental education (Sato, 2006). This key document stressed

the importance of resource conservation through sustainable development and the

2

mutual inter-dependency of conservation and development (Chenrachasit, 2006;

Palmer, 1998).

Agenda 21 - the centrepiece of agreements during the United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development or The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro

on 3-14 June 1992 - was a major action programme setting out strategies for

nations to achieve sustainable development in the 21st century (Palmer, 1998). The

40 chapters of Agenda 21 included topics ranging from poverty, desertification and

free trade to youth and education. Chapter 25 (Children and Youth in Sustainable

Development) and Chapter 36 (Promoting Education, Public Awareness and Training)

have significant implications for environmental education.

Another important document produced during the Summit was the Rio

Declaration. This was a statement of 27 principles for sustainability which provided

the basis for the programmes of international co-operation in Agenda 21. To

summarise, the Rio Declaration prepared a blueprint for a sustainable future, while

Agenda 21 provided a guiding programme for interpretation.

With the latest development on Education for Sustainable Development

(ESD), environmental education experts have argued and debated on the difference

between environmental education and ESD. Environmental education and ESD are

concerned with achieving the same ends: enabling learners to question unsustainable

practices and participate in changing these practices (Gough, 2006a). The difference

is in the scope covered in achieving this goal and in the focus. The goals and

objectives of environmental education have usually referred to the environment and

its associated problems, and finding ways of resolving these (Gough, 2006a). ESD

encompasses environmental education, setting it in the broader context of socio­

cultural factors and the socio-political issues of equity, poverty, democracy and

quality of life as well as a development perspective on social change and evolving

circumstances (Gough, 2006a). (Gough, 2006a) further elaborated that ESD still had

much in common with earlier conceptions of environmental education, including

objectives encouraging critical thinking, values analysis and active citizenship in

environmental contexts, but differed in that ESD is envisaged as ultimately about

3

education and capacity building and only secondly about environmental problem­

solving.

In Malaysia, the importance of environmental education towards sustainable

development is greatly emphasised in the National Policy on the Environment 2002.

The policy sets out the principles and strategies to ensure that the environment

remains productive, both ecologically and economically (MSTE, 2002). The objectives

of the policy are to achieve the following:

a. A clean, safe, healthy and productive environment for present and future

generations;

b. Conservation of the country's unique and diverse cultural and natural heritage

with effective participation; and

c. Sustainable lifestyles and patterns of consumption and production.

The policy comprises of seven green strategies to attain the policy objectives.

One of the key areas of the green strategies outlined in the policy is education and

awareness. Environmental education and awareness is promoted across the board to

achieve a deeper and better understanding of the environment and sustainable

development. Incorporating information dissemination and training in line with the

recommendations of Chapter 36 (Promoting Education, Public Awareness and

Training) in Agenda 21 has significant implications for environmental education.

Various governmental organisations such as Department of Environment,

Environment Protection Department, Forestry Department, non-governmental

organisations (NGOs) such as Malaysian Nature Society and Sabah Environmental

Protection Association, and the private sector such as Shell and Petronas are involved

in the implementation of environmental education in Malaysia. They conduct informal

environmental education to instil and create awareness and generate actions

amongst the public and various target groups in the community.

Formal teachings for environmental education are carried out through an

approach known as environmental education across the curriculum for all primary

and secondary schools throughout the country. Environmental education is not

taught as a single subject but rather infused in each subject in schools. These

4

subjects include Bahasa Me/ayu, English, Mathematics, Science, Living Skills,

Religious Studies, Physical Education, Geography and Kajian Tempatan. Some

subjects such as Geography, Science and Kajian Tempatan have the elements of

environmental education incorporated in the syllabus. However, for other subjects,

teachers are required to incorporate elements of environmental education during

their teaching periods.

The 3K Programme on cleanliness, health and safety has been implemented

in schools in Malaysia since 1991 (Yahaya, 2003). Its aim is to ensure that all schools

have a strong system to deal with issues pertaining to safety, health and cleanliness

in schools. The implementation of environmental education across the curriculum and

the 3K Programme has exposed students and teachers to the importance of

protecting the environment and to ensure its cleanliness. A document entitled Pe/an

Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan 2006-2010 by the Ministry of Education Malaysia

reiterated among others the importance of strengthening cleanliness, health and

safely in schools. The ministry is also publishing a guideline on cleanliness practices

in schools. This will detail out activities that can be carried out by students and

teachers. Based on the ministry's evaluation, there has been an improvement in the

number of students practising good values related to cleanliness, health and safety in

schools (MEM, 2006).

The establishment of green schools worldwide as an environmental education

programme and award scheme is an effort to inculcate and instil a deep sense of

environmental awareness and action amongst the younger generation. A green

school is one, which adopts a process, in which it keeps improving itself under the

condition of sustainable development, exercises self-management, improves

educational methods and approaches, improves its operational efficiency and profits.

It also continuously solves its own issues pertaining to sustainable development

(Jiang, 2004).

A new term, ESD-schools, is being proposed at the international level through

the Environment and School Initiatives (ENSI) based in Switzerland. By using the new

term, there will be new challenges for schools that wish to engage in ESD-oriented

development (Breiting, Mayer, & Mogensen, 2005). According to Breiting, Mayer and

5

Mogensen (2005), ESD is not only dealing with aspects of people's dependence on

the quality of the environment and access to natural resources now and in the future.

It also deals with aspects of participation, self efficacy, equality and social justice that

are essential perspectives in preparing students for the engagement in sustainable

development.

1.2 SEKOLAH RAKAN ALAM SEKrrAR (SERASI)

As part of the Federal Government of Malaysia's effort to promote the concept of

green schools, the Seko/ah Lestari environmental education programme and award

scheme has been established. The aim of Seko/ah Lestariis to support and enhance

the implementation of the National Policy on the Environment 2002 (DOE, 2004).

Seko/ah Lestari adopts an integrated approach involving the school community as a

whole, their families, local communities, government, private sector and non­

governmental organisations. It embraces environmental education through

continuous infusion and incorporation of positive environmental values in school

management, curriculum, co-curriculum and greening activities towards sustainable

development. Seko/ah Lestari also serves as a centre for learning and education that

can influence the school community and society towards a better way of life.

At the Sabah state level, a similar environmental education programme

known as the EnVironment-Friendly School Programme or Program Seko/ah Rakan

A/am Sekitar (SERASI) was implemented in 2003 in Sabah. SERASI is a long-term

environmental education programme and award scheme for primary and secondary

schools in Sabah jOintly organised by the Environment Protection Department, Sabah

Forestry Department, Science and Technology Unit, Environmental Action Committee

Sabah, Department of Environment, Sabah Education Department, Sabah Wetlands

Conservation Society (Kota Kinabalu Wetland Centre) and Shell Malaysia. The wide

interest in SERASI from various organisations has helped to ensure its sustainability

throughout the years. SERASI is implemented in conjunction with the Malaysia

Environment Week (MEW).

SERASI was introduced to acknowledge the efforts by schools in Sabah in

promoting environmental education and creating awareness amongst their students,

6

teachers and staff. The objectives of SERASI are as follows (EPD, 200Sa; Pudin,

2006):

a. to enhance awareness on the importance of environmental protection and

conservation in schools;

b. to instil positive and caring attitude for the environment amongst the

students, teachers and staff as well as the local communities;

c. to encourage innovation towards the creation of a school's environment that

emphasises on environmental protection and conservation; and

d. to acknowledge the continuous efforts by schools in promoting environmental

education programmes.

The concept of SERASI is based on the continuous environmental protection

and conservation practices. It also supports and strengthens environmental education

across the curriculum. SERASI takes a holistic approach that connects schools with

the local communities, families, the government, private sector and NGOs. This

concept also emphasises on the integrated approach in management, curriculum, co­

curriculum and greening of schools (EPD, 200Sa).

Apart from being an environmental education programme, SERASI is also

an award scheme in which awards are given as incentives to schools. There are five

main criteria to guide schools in implementing SERASI namely environmental

management, environmental activities, greening the school, cleanliness and

beautification of school and environmental innovation (EPD, 200Sa). These are also

the criteria upon which schools are evaluated for the awards. Factors considered in

environmental management are incorporation of environmental values in school's

vision/mission, availability of environmental materials, records of environmental

management in school and dissemination of environmental information in school.

Environmental activities include cleaning up activities, environment-related

celebrations (Earth Day, World Environment Day, Malaysia Environment Week, etc),

seminars, workshops, exhibitions, camps, and study trips. Greening the school

involves efforts in reusing rainwater, compost-making, wise usage of paper, etc.

Cleanliness and beautification of school includes efforts in improving school's

landscape, drains, canteens and tOilets, and proper management of waste.

7

Environmental innovation efforts include activities promoting environmental

innovation in schools.

SERASI is promoted to all rural and urban primary and secondary schools in

Sabah. However, due to limited resources, personnel and time on the part of the

organisers to visit more than 1000 schools in the state annually, schools are

nominated by District Education Offices to represent each district in the programme.

This is called Level One (Figure 1.1). Nominations are received and handled by the

SERASI Secretariat. The number of schools in each district differs from one another.

Based on data from the Education Department in 2006, there are 209 secondary

schools and 1060 primary schools in all 26 districts in Sabah. The number of schools

nominated from each district in 2006 was based on the quota of 1:3 for secondary

schools and 1:7 in primary schools. For example, if the district of Beaufort has nine

secondary schools and 41 primary schools, then the number of schools representing

the district is three secondary and six primary schools. Level Two involves visits to all

the nominated schools in 26 districts by a group of judges. Based on the results of

Level Two, 20 primary and 20 secondary schools will enter Level Three or the Final

Round. Another group of judges will visit the finalists in which interviews are carried

out with principals, teachers and students of the schools. Interviews include

questions on the level of commitment, involvement, action plans for environmental

education in schools and involvement of local communities in the school's

programmes.

In 2006, Wira SERASI (SERASI Hero) was introduced. Schools that have won

the overall award since 2003 are eligible to participate. These schools are judged

independently from the finalists. For the 2007/2008 programme, another category

called the Wira Harapan SERASI (Potential SERASI Hero) was introduced whereby

schools that have won awards in any of the categories are eligible to participate.

They are required to submit reports of their efforts, and visits will also be conducted

by a group of judges.

8

LEVEL THREE Judges visit all finalists and conduct

interviews with principals, teachers and students

LEVEL TWO Judges visit all nominated schools and the best 20 primary and 20 secondary schools enter the third and final level

Nominations are SERASI Secretari

LEVEL ONE Schools are nominated by District

Education Offices according to the quota for each district given by organisers

Figure 1.1: The Three Judging Levels in SERASI

received by at

In this research, data from schools implementing the SERASI programme in

2005 were used. In 2005, the quota of number of schools representing each district

was approximately 1:5 for secondary schools and 1:10 for primary schools, less than

that of 2006 (EPD, 2005a). Based on data provided by the Education Department in

2005 (SED, 2005), there were 186 secondary schools and 1057 primary schools in

Sabah. 152 schools were expected to be nominated by the District Education Offices.

However, the total number of nominations received was only 148 schools - 43

secondary schools and 105 primary schools. For the purpose of this research, the

population chosen was the 148 schools nominated in 2005. However, due to logistic

constraints, only schools in 30% of districts in Sabah were involved in the research.

9

1.3 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The many challenges humankind faces today as a global community are the growing

population, poverty, environmental problems, conflict, violence and inappropriate

development. These challenges are exerting pressure and weakening the earth

system in which humans depend upon and live in (Bhandari & Abe, 2003). Based on

(Wang et al., 2004), environmental issues often arise from a lack of understanding of

nature and the ecological environment and inappropriate use of natural resources.

However, the international community is now more aware of the importance of

environmental education in the efforts to protect and manage the environment.

To counter environmental challenges, it is extremely crucial to vigorously step

up efforts (Pudin et al., 2005) to fully utilise the tool outlined in the Chapter 36 of

Agenda 21. Chapter 36 in Agenda 21 stressed on the following (UN, 1992):

Education, including formal education, public awareness and training, should be recognised as a process by which human beings and societies can reach their fullest potential. Education is critical for achieving environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective public participation in decision­making. Both formal and non-formal education are indispensable to changing people's attitude so that they have the capacity to assess and address their sustainable development concerns.

Environmental education in schools is aimed at a large number of people who

will become leaders in the future and decision-makers of the country (Wang et aI.,

2004). By instilling environmental awareness and action at an early stage, the next

generation will become an environmentally responsible society with a deep sense of

caring towards the environment. Implementation of various environmental

programmes and activities in schools can disseminate environmental information to

students. This will contribute to the process of learning. However, evaluation of

programmes or activities needs to be carried out to find out the effectiveness of the

programme in creating awareness and actions among the target groups.

Research has shown that educational efforts can significantly increase

awareness about the environment and improve attitudes towards it (Veitch &

Arkkelin, 1995). Veitch and Arkkelin (1995) emphasised that education is important

10

REFERENCES

Ahmad Shah, H. 2004. Kajian tentang Penyepaduan Pendidikan Alam Sekitar dalam Kokurikulum di kalangan Guru Pelatih Maktab Perguruan. Unpublished Master Thesis. Kota Kinabalu: Universiti Malaysia Sabah.

Baron, R. A., & Byrne, D. 2004. Social Psychology (10th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bell, P. A., Greene, T. c., Fisher, J. D., & Baum, A. 2001. Environmental Psychology (5th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Group/Thomas Learning.

Bhandari, B. B., & Abe, O. 2003. Education for Sustainable Development: An Emerging Paradigm. Education for Sustainable Development in Nepal - Views and Visions, 13-27.

Blakeley, J., Rush, M., & Callaghan, R. 1999. Environmental Education: A Guide for Programme Providers - how to develop, implement and evaluate strategies and programmes. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.

Bohner, G., & Wanke, M. 2002. Attitudes and Attitude Change. East Sussex: Psychology Press.

Breiting, 5., Mayer, M., & Mogensen, F. 2005. Quality Criteria for ESD-Schools. Guidelines to enhance quality for Education for Sustainable Development Austria.

Carlson, N. R., & Buskist, W. 1997. Psychology: The Science of Behaviour (5th ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.

Chenrachasit, P. 2006. Implementing Environmental Education for Sustainable Development. Paper presented at the 10th APEID Conference on Education for Sustainable Development, Bangkok.

Chu, H. E., Shin, D. H. & Lee, M. N. 2006. Korean Students' Environmental Literacy and Variables Affecting Environmental Literacy. Paper presented at the 2006 Conference of the Australian Association of Environmental Education, Bunbury, Australia.

Daft, R. L. 1999. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Orlando: The Dryden Press.

Darley, J. M., Glucksberg, 5., & Kinchla, R. A. 1991. Psychology (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Davis, S. F., & Palladino, J. J. 2005. Psychology (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.

Dietz, T., & Stern, P. C. 2002. New Tools for Environmental Protection: Education, Information and Voluntary Measures. Washington: National Academy of Sciences.

99

DOE. 2004. Asas Pembentukan Sekolah Lestari-Anugerah Alam Sekitar. Shah Alam: Department of Environment.

EPD. 2002. Environment Protection Enactment Kota Kinabalu: Environment Protection DepartmentjSabah State Government.

EPD. 2005a. Background Information on SERASI Programme. Kota Kinabalu: Environment Protection Department.

EPD. 2005b. List of SERASI School Nomination 2005. Kota Kinabalu: Environment Protection Department.

EPD. 2005c. Sabah Environmental Education Network (SEEN) Guidelines. Kota Kinabalu: Environment Protection Department.

EPD. 2007a. List of Sabah Environmental Education Network (SEEN) Members. Kota Kinabalu: Environment Protection Department.

x ~.:: t:'C1

EPD. 2007b. Sabah Map. Kota Kinabalu: Environment Protection Department. ~§

2: .... '1;

Feldman, R. S. 1999. Understanding Psychology (5th ed.). New York: The MCGraw- ~ n Hill Companies, Inc. ~ ~ ~~

!:::? .,,' ~ .~

Fien, J. 2006. A Letter from the Future: UNESCO and the Decade of Education for ffi F. Sustainable Development. Australian Journal of Environmental Education. D- ~ 22(1),63-70. Z

Gardner, G. T., & Stern, P. C. 1996. Environmental Problems and Human Behaviour. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon

Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. 2003. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.

Gerow, J. R. 1992. Psychology: An Introduction (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.

Gerrig, R. J., & Zimbardo, P. G. 2005. Psychology and Life (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Gough, A. 2006a. A Long, Winding (and Rocky) Road to Environmental Education for Sustainability in 2006. Australian Journal of Environmental Education. 22(1), 71-76.

Gough, A. 2006b. Working at the margins of sustainabllity: Implementing ESD in Victorian government schools. Paper presented at the Seminar at the University of Bath, Centre for Research in Education and in the Environment.

100

:::;:)

Gralton, A., Sinclair, M., & Purnell, K. 2004. Changes in Attitudes Beliefs and Behavi?ur: A. ~ri~ical Review.of Research into the impacts of Environmental Education Initiatives. Australian Journal of Environmental Education. 20(2) 41-52. '

Haddad, c., Eli.as, D., Naka~ama, S., & Hargreav~s, L. 20~5. A Situational Analysis of EducatIon for Sustamable Development m the ASIa-PaCific Region. Bangkok: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education.

Hassan, A. 2006. An Analysis of School Teachers' Attitudes on the Importance of Environmental Education Goals. Malaysian Journal of Analytical Sciences. 10(2), 303-312.

Henderson, K., & Tilbury, D. 2004. Whole-School Approaches to Sustainability: An International Review of Sustainable School Programmes. Sydney: Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES).

Huffman, K. 2007. Psychology in Action (8th ed.). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Jiang, K. 2004. Analysis of Research Findings on EnVironmental Education in Secondary Vocational Schools in Shanghai. Chinese Education and Society. 37(4), 32-38.

Jickling, B. 2006. The Decade of Education for Sustainable Development: A Useful Platform? Or an Annoying Distraction? A Canadian Perspective. Australian Journal of Environmental Education. 22(1), 99-104.

Juin, E. 2001. Keynote Address on Environmental Management in Sabah: Issues and Challenges. Paper presented at the 6th Sabah Inter-Agency Tropical Ecosystem Research Seminar, Kota Kinabalu.

Kadir, A. A. 2000. Teacher Education Programme for Environmental Education in Malaysia. Tokyo: UNESCO Japan.

Kosslyn, S. M., & Rosenberg, R. S. 2003. Fundamentals of Psychology - The Brain, The Person, The World. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Mayer, M., & Mogensen, F. 2005. A quest for scenarios in the eco-school programmes - a comparative analysis. In Mayer, M. & Mogensen, F. (eds.). Eco-Schools: Trends and Divergence. Vienna: Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.

MEM. 2006. Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan 2006-2010. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education Malaysia.

Miller, K. 2005. Communication theories: perspectives, processes and contexts. Boston: McGraw-HilI.

101

MSTE. (2002). National Policy on the Environment Bandar Baru Bangi: Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment, Malaysia.

O'Donoghue, R., & Lotz-Sisitka, H. 2006. Situated Environmental Learning in Southern Africa at the Start of the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. Australian Journal of Environmental Education. 22(1), 105-113.

Palmer, J. A. 1998. Environmental Education in the 21st Century: Theo~ Practice/ Progress and Promise. New York: Routledge.

Pang, V. 2005. Curriculum Evaluation: An Application in a Smart School Curriculum Implementation. Kota Kinabalu: Universiti Malaysia Sabah.

Plotnik, R. 1999. Introduction to Psychology (5th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Pudin, S. 2006. Implementation and Lessons Learned from the Serasi Programme in Sabah Malaysia. Paper presented at the 2006 Conference of the Australian Association of Environmental Education, Bunbury, Australia.

Pudin, 5., Tagi, T., & Periasamy, A. 2005. Environmental Education in Malaysia and Japan: A Comparative Assessment Paper presented at the International Conference on Education for a Sustainable Future, Ahmedabad.

Punch, K. F. 1998. Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches . . Wiltshire: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. 2004. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.

Sato, M. 2006. Evolving Environmental Education and its relation to EPD and ESD ­Overview of the Conceptual Development based on a series of International Discussion on Environmental Education. Paper presented at the UNESCO Expert Meeting on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD): Reorienting Education to address Sustainability, Kanchanaburi.

SED. (2005). Senarai Sekolah-Sekolah di Sabah. Kota Kinabalu: Sabah Education Department.

Stokking, H., Aert, L., Meijberg, W., & Kaskens, A. 1999. Evaluating Environmental Education. Gland: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.

Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. 1985. Systematic evaluation: a self-instructional guide to theory and practice. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.

Taylor, S. E., Peplau, L. A., & Sears, D. O. 2000. Social Psychology (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

102

lilbury, M. 2004. Rising to the Challenge: Education for Sustainability in Australia. Australian Journal of Environmental Education. 20(2), 103-114.

Trochim, W. M. K. 2006. Social Research Methods. (Online) http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/quasioth.php. Retrieved 7 June 2007.

UN. 1992. United Nations Conference on Environment & Development Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992 AGENDA 21.

UN. 2007. Sustainable Development (Online) http:www.un.org/issues/m­susdev.html. Retrieved 21 April 2007.

UNESCO. 1975. The Belgrade Charter A Global Framework for Environmental Education.

UNESCO. 1997. Thessaloniki Declaration. (Online) http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/file download.php/d400258bf583e49cd 49ab70d6e7992f6Thessaloniki+deciaration.doc. Retrieved 24th January 2007.

UNESCO. 2005a. Promotion of a Global Partnership for the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014) - The International Implementation Scheme for the Decade in brief. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO).

UNESCO. 2005b. United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014): International Implementation Scheme. Paris.

Veitch, R., & Arkkelin, D. 1995. Environmental Psychology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Wang, J., He, Y., Li, Y., He, X., Wang, X., & Jue, Y. 2004. An Analysis of Environmental Awareness and Environmental Education for Primary and High School Students in Kunming. Chinese Education and Society. 37(4), 24-31.

Yahaya, Z. 2003. Program 3K berkonsep baru mulai 2004. (Online) http://www.tutor.com.my/tutor/dunia.asp?y=2003&dt=1204&Oub= DuniaPen didikan&sec=Program 3K&pg=3k 01.htm. Retrieved 5th July 2007.

103