Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Literacy of Children on Ecological System and Environmental Learning in
Home Garden Environment
Prepared by:
Sarah Alia Norazlan
PhD Candidate (PBE173009)
Supervisor:
Prof. Dr. Ismail Said
Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
81310 Skudai, Johor.
May 2018
2
1. Research Topic
Literacy of Children on Ecological System and Environmental Learning in Home
Garden Environment
2. Research Aim
The aim of study is to investigate the depth of middle childhood children’s
literacy on ecological system in home garden environment of Malaysia and its effects
on their competences toward environmental learning.
3. Research Objectives
To achieve the aim, the following research objectives are formulated:
i. To identify the factors that influence the literacy of children on home
gardens ecosystems;
ii. To examine the children’s performances on ecological literacy in home
gardens when engaging with their everyday ecology; and
iii. To analyse the perceptions of children on home gardens ecosystems
through the process of interaction for environmental learning
4. Assumption
Reconnecting children to interact with the living systems in the natural
environment allow them to enrich their thinking and learning as well as a belief that
ecological may be a particular important domain in early childhood (Worth, 2010).
The exposure to nature is not serving as a basis for future science understanding, but
also to build important skills and attitudes for learning (Worth,2010). The openness to
experience with biodiversity in the outdoor environment (Chawla & Heft, 2002) will
lead children to have sense of sensibility (Cobb & Mead, 1977) and sensitivity
(Corsino, 2006). Learning ecology are “privileged domain” in which children have
natural tendency to learn, to experiment, to explore that will allow them to nurturing
the capacities (Kellert, 2002) and beyond the boundaries of learning (Wake & Eames,
2013) in which they already actively. Thus, the context of home gardens including
3
orchard, open field, neighbourhood yards and street has a significant impact on
children’s direct experience, learning and supportive of childhood development in
physical, cognitive, social and emotional performances (e.g. Gordon, A. & Browne,
2015; Murtaza, 2011).
5. Research Questions
The research questions are as follows:
i. Does the everyday landscape in rural environment afford place for children to
be physically active towards environmental learning?
ii. How the children used the home gardens environment for outdoor play and
learning?
iii. What are the elements of home gardens that influence children’s activity and
play behaviour patterns towards environmental learning?
iv. What are the possible competences of children when experiencing their
everyday ecology?
v. What are the children’s perceptions and preferences on home gardens
environment and environmental learning?
6. Research Background
There is a growing body of empirical studies that children’s play and learning
contact with natural environment is fundamental for children. An example, in rural
village has large green areas, orchard, forest, and river where children are allowed to
wander (Kyttä, 2002), have high degree of sensitivity (Corsino, 2006) and sensibility
(Cobb & Mead, 1977) and sense of control (Maitland, Stratton, Foster, Braham, &
Rosenberg, 2014). Traditionally, the natural environment has been a site for children
to play with many physical activities (e.g. Wheway, 2015; Fjortoft, 2004). Rivkin
(2000) states that most children appear to benefit from being outdoor where they able
to intense their sensorial actions including seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, tasting
and navigating in exploring and discovering their environment. This understanding
suggests that children’s interaction with nature is expanding their physical and social,
4
cognition and emotion performances (Rios & Menezes, 2017; Rezasoltani & Said,
2012; Malone, 2007; Chawla & Heft, 2002). Children contact with nature through
tending gardens and being in outdoor spaces with plants and animals (Chawla, 2007;
Lester & Moudsley, 2006; Clayton & Opotow, 2003). Appropriate physical
environment such as children home environment has potential as site which promote
environmental learning and will give them endless ways to develop and maximizing
learning. Children able to maximize their learning when learning promotes high
motivation for interaction, exploration, discovery and experimental (Malone &
Tranter, 2003a; Moore, 1997) in constructing knowledge, not by memorizing facts
(Piaget, 1962). This is because the home surrounding is the richest, most detailed, and
most readily available informational context provided for children to encounter
(Kellert, 2005b). Therefore, Gardner (1991) posits that environmental learning fosters
connected knowing of children where education is part of, rather than separate from
life.
Children have their own unique experiential ways of learning (Leach, Driver,
Scott, & Wood-Robinson, 2007) and knowing the natural world (White, 2004b;
Corsino, 2006). For instance, why children learn about rambutans from a book or
digital media when they could have them in an orchard outside their window.
Engaging children with the nature allows them to discover and support the link
between experience and developing environmental learning (Malone & Tranter,
2003a). Generally, environmental learning can occur in three ways of experiencing the
nature; (i) directly: physical contact with nature environment, (ii) indirectly: limited of
physical contact with nature and instructed, and (iii) vicarious or symbolism: no
physical contact with nature environment where children learn by their imagination
through feelings or actions (Duerden & Witt, 2010; Malone & Tranter, 2003b; Kellert,
2002). In other words, direct experience with nature, as opposed to indirect and
vicarious, more commonly and fully provide the unstructured, spontaneous, unplanned
immersion, challenges, and inspirations necessary for maturation and development in
children (Kellert, 2005a). Therefore, by listening and interacting with children within
this environment may develop mutual exchanges, thus promoting expansion of
knowledge as well as giving children the opportunity to move to a different stage of
conceptual understanding (de Brito Miranda, Jófili, & dos Anjos Carneiro-Leão,
2016). Home gardens are one of the settings that can address the flexible learning as it
5
gives children choices about what, where, why, when and how they learn. This implies
sensitivity (Corsino, 2006), sensibility (Cobb & Mead, 1977) and willingness
(Corsino, 2006) on children to classify, observe, investigate, explore, develop
responses and interpret the phenomena around them (Kellert, 2005a). Moreover,
environmental learning is an environment that affords the children to learn about
nature and ecological system in which influence their childhood growth and
development (Kellert, 2002) as well as their performances.
Figure 1: Modes of experiencing nature and learning in childhood
development (Source: Kellert, 2002)
In order to constantly restructure their thinking, children need to be given
opportunities to construct concepts or ideas, make observations, ask questions, read
the world, create relationships, test hypotheses and reflect on their actions (de Brito
Miranda et al., 2016). This presupposes a great challenge for teacher to be able to
observe the children constructing meaning, through the process of interaction (de Brito
Miranda et al., 2016) in the schools’ curriculum. In parallel to Lima (1999), the
environment should enable the children to construct concepts, at any level of education
and period development, gaining experience and information to enrich their repertoire
and to use methodological procedures for the successive integration of new learning
into their existing knowledge base.
Ecological literacy plays an important part of learning at all levels. Literacy of
children on ecological system depends on children’s ability to know and understand
6
basic knowledge of ecology. Fundamental of ecology is defined as the study of
organismal diversity and of the interactions between living organisms to one another
and their surroundings including water, sunlight and soil (Courchamp et al., 2015).
Children seek to understand the living organisms interact with other living organisms
that are between plants and animals and its physical environment (Ünal & Nan, 2010).
For instance, children learn the interactions and interrelationships among and between
organisms found in orchard. A key part of ecological literacy is reconnecting children
to living systems that is children’s good knowledge on relationship with nature. This
understanding allows children to learn nature through direct experiences (Capra, 2006)
that fosters their interaction, autonomy, exploration, curiosity and sense of
responsibility (Ferreira, Cruz, & Pitarma, 2016; Courchamp et al., 2015; Murtaza,
2011; White, 2004). In order to constantly restructure their thinking (de Brito Miranda
et al., 2016), children are given opportunities to make observations, ask questions,
create relationships, test hypothesis and reflect on their actions.
In summary, children perceive the outdoor as a place (Shamsuddin & Said, 2008)
that affords them to play and learn about natural elements including ecological system
where they are able to be physically active, creative and problem solving. In addition,
perception and action in the natural setting can permit them to exploit nature and learn
about nature elements (Kellert, 2005a) in ecology. This is because children perceive
the environment more to the functional. Therefore, this can stimulate their
performances and shaping their learning behaviour.
7. Problem Statement
Home setting is a place that children spend most of their time to play, rest or
enjoy (Said, 2007). Children begin their everyday life from home to the outdoor
surroundings including home yard, ditch, orchard, forest, and street. Without children
realized, they are engaging with their surroundings and naturally become a part of their
play activities and daily learning. The environment is a giant and open-ended learning
laboratory (Children and Nature, 2013). However, school has been a place for children
where they spent a large portion of their knowledge in the classroom. Gardner (1991)
posits that scholastic knowledge to children seem strictly bound to school settings. In
Malaysian school curriculum, children are taught on principles of ecology. However,
7
children have been taught the science learning more on abstract where they cannot
feel, touch, navigate and observe directly. Limiting children’s ability to participate in
data transformation processes (Lanouette, Wart, & Parikh, 2016). This phenomenon
of study is often decontextualized (Metz, 2004) and separated from children’s
everyday life experiences (Rivet & Krajcik, 2008), with science instruction rarely
engaging with their everyday surroundings as sites for ecological inquiry. As a result,
children related literacy is seldom utilized, missing a key opportunity to integrate
children’s extensive everyday forms of knowing (Vygotsky, 1986), seeing and doing.
In 2017, the composition of children under 18 years old is 29.4%, that is
approximately 9.4 million children out of 32 million populations in Malaysia (Children
Statistics Malaysia, 2017). According to the Ministry of Education Malaysia (2016),
the number of children enrolled in the public primary school in Malaysia, aged 7-12,
currently about 2,683,753. The middle children have been taught the syllabus related
about environment including in science subject. Based on education report from
Syllabus for Integrated Curriculum for Primary School Science (2003), children
learned about living things (i.e. animals, plants, soil, sun) and world around them by
using their senses in the lower level of learning, that is standard one to three. As the
children go to a standard four and above, the syllabus expended to a complex and
investigation. For instance, children begin to investigate living and non-things which
are life processes, food chain, photosynthesis, force and energy, the Earth and the
universe, materials and technology. The learning outcomes integrated into two themes;
1) scientific skills required investigation and understanding of nature including
problem solving, decision making and manipulative skills and 2) thinking skills
required to develop children’s thoughtful learning such as being critical and creative
in attributing, analysing, evaluating, making inferences, generalizations and making
hypotheses.
To investigate the literacy of children on ecological system towards
environmental learning, a preliminary study was conducted at Kampung Jawa Ulu,
Pontian, Johor on 6th November 2017 at community services responsibility (CSR)
program. Thirty-seven primary school children from standard five to standard six, aged
11-12 were participated. Participatory observations were recorded the children’s ideas,
actions, expressions and spontaneous talk with the instructor. This session allowed the
8
children to develop their competencies in perceptual and action that lead to ecological
literacy for children on learning to know, learning to be, learning to do and learning to
live together (Draft Global Issues Pilot August, 2011). This phenomena revealed that
children explore the natural elements, be curious, make observation and engage in
simple investigation (Worth, 2010). During the ecological trail, the instructor was
brought the children to home gardens including yard, ditches and oil palm farm at the
village. The instructor was briefing described the ecological system. For example,
children were able to know and see that the rambutan tree provide shelter for ants and
ants provide protection from other animals. This shows that children are started to see
things directly in which stimulating children’s sensorial and action, thus leads to deep
ecology. Children are given their opportunities to make observations, ask questions,
read the world, create relationships and reflect on their actions (de Brito Miranda et
al., 2016). At the same time, researcher observed the depth of children’s literacy on
ecology through their responses. The results showed that children’s experience in their
home gardens appeared to increase their responses on particular situations and
involved in sensorial actions (Malone & Tranter, 2003a) to learn about ecological
system. Therefore, children have their own senses on how they fit themselves into
situations. Children able to have their opportunity to reflect on their ideas especially
when they experience with peers. Through direct engagement with the elements of
nature, children are given opportunities to integrate their ideas about the nature
systems.
Based on the result, it shows that literacy of children on ecology are most
intense their own common ideas and senses rather than using scientific terminology.
None of them were answered from what they had learn in the school. When the
children were asked about how the water striders can be floating on the water. Some
examples of interesting answers given by the children were, “…because it was light”
and “…because the legs act as lifebuoy, so that is why it can float on the water”. From
the result of pilot study, it showed that children develop their own answers to problems
(Ferreira et al., 2016). In parallel to Pereira (2009a:12), children build their concept
ideas and explanations, which may not correspond to current scientific knowledge,
beyond on what is written in the books. Therefore, there is a chance for researcher’s
gap to give a look at children when they engage with outdoor environment within
home environment including garden, yard, orchard, trench, stream, street, river, and
9
farm. This shows that when they engage with these spaces, they get or understand
naturally about ecology. According to Coffey (2001), nature environment itself is
children’s best teacher rather than textbooks, videos, and lectures because it is the ways
for children to learn about environment is to experience it.
Therefore, there is a chance for researcher’s gap to give a look at children when
they engage with outdoor environment within home environment including garden,
yard, orchard, trench, stream, street, river, and farm. This shows that when they engage
with these spaces, they get or understand naturally about ecology. According to Coffey
(2001), nature environment itself is children’s best teacher rather than textbooks,
videos, and lectures because it is the ways for children to learn about environment is
to experience it.
8. Research Gap
Over the years, the body of research in play and learning of science regarding
the natural environment has grown. From the previous research, these has been
revealed that children prefer to be in contact in the outdoor environment (Norðdahl &
Einarsdóttir, 2014; Waller et. al, 2010; Malone & Tranter, 2003b). Despite of urban
children, there are few studies have explored on how children’s understanding of
concept ideas in ecological systems at specific ages within their outdoor environment.
Little attention has given to explore the children’s understanding of matter plants and
animals (Leach et al., 2007; Wood-Robinson, 1991) within their home gardens in
Malaysia. The present study is therefore designed to investigate the ways of children
thinking and explain situations which involve their current knowledge of
understandings the plants and animals and its interdependency in ecosystems. Table 1
shows the summary of related studies on children engaging with outdoor environment.
Table 1: Trend of related studies on children’s outdoor environmental learning
Authors (Years)
Concerns and Findings Settings Variables
Colb (1969); Heft (1999);
The ecology of imagination • The imagination of childhood is based on
the biographical and autobiographical memories that are relating with relationship between observer and environment; human and place.
Natural setting
• Understanding • Behaviour • Sense of place
10
Cambourne (1988); Singal, N. (2009), Cohen, S. (1990), Powell, M. (2007)
Concerns: Learning setting • Out-of-the school learning experiences,
both structured and less formalized were perceived by children as being more active, collaborative and challenging, contributing to their understanding of their place within the environment.
Primary schools (UK), Schools of rural and middle-class community, Elementary school (US)
• Education setting
• Learning experiences
• Perceptions
Fjortoft (2001); Chatterjee (2005); Maynard, (2013); Skar, Gundersen & O’Brien (2016)
Concerns: Learning experience • Direct experience with natural elements
contribute to the children’s development of environmental disposition, intense opportunities for them to apply what they had been instructed during the preparation process.
• The children have been focused on the impact of learning and skills development in natural spaces.
Natural environment (Norway), Learning in outdoor environment
• Experience • Action • Attitude &
Behaviour • Physical,
cognitive & social aspect
Sobel (2002); Malone (2003); Wagoner (2010); Veselinovska et. al (2010); Aziz (2014); Askerlund & Almers (2016)
Concerns: School grounds, zoo, parks and forest as sites for learning of nature systems • Most of the urban children have limited
access to natural landscapes and lack of affordances, which influence the cognitive, social and physical activity levels.
• Most of the studies focused on urban children who have limited access to nature. Therefore, the affordances of environment influence the physical activity levels.
Primary school project work, Middle children in urban & semi-urban area (Portugal), Primary school in urban & rural area (Malaysia), London Zoo (UK)
• Knowledge • Perception • Behaviour • Experience • Learning • Ecological
system • Affordance
Mindes (2006); Said (2012); Lloyd & Wilkinson (2016); Green (2017);
Concerns: Everyday landscapes as sites for outdoor play and learning • There is still lack of studies that examine
the lived experiences on place-based education
• Children with good natural resources (have high accessibility to spaces) have greater degree of interaction and competences than children with limited resources.
Early and middle children in rural area (Alaska) Nearby Forest and Orchard (Malaysia)
• Experience • Knowledge • Perception • Action • Sensibility • Sensitivity • Affordances
As shown in the Table 1, numerous studies of children learning in outdoor
classroom including forest and school ground, were conducted in both western and
Asian countries. In fact, the study of children’s literacy on ecological should be
11
investigated because different context may afford different degree of children’s
interactions. However, in Malaysia context, there are still lack of research that explore
the ways of learning where children’s understanding of plants and animals and their
functioning through direct experiences within their home environment. Nevertheless,
this will enhance a good relationship of children with their home gardens environment
have become part of their everyday engagement, thus leads to purposeful, authentic
(Maynard & Waters, 2007) and meaningful. On the other hand, children may have the
intentions to go out from the classroom but hindered by school curriculums because
this is a method of adults to impose on children’s ideas of what is important to learn
and how to learn. Therefore, there is a need to look at children when they engage with
outdoors, that are home environment. This exploratory study will lead us to understand
children’s perception and behaviour in environment.
Table 2: Research Statements
Aim: To investigate the depth of middle childhood children’s literacy on ecological
system in home garden environment of Malaysia and its effects on their
competences toward environmental learning.
Problem Statements and Gap
• Children are received a large portion of knowledge on science ecology in school, strictly bound to school where they learn through abstract learning. Children have been separated from their everyday experience and known as decontextualized.
• Children’s literacy are rarely utilised, missing key opportunities to integrate their extensive everyday form in knowing (perception), seeing (perception) and doing (action).
Research Questions Research Objectives
Environment
RQ1: What are the physical attributes and characteristics that afford places for children to be physically active towards environmental learning? RQ2: How the children used the home gardens environment for outdoor play and learning?
RO1: To identify the factors that influence the literacy of children on home gardens ecosystems
Actions
RQ3: What are the elements of home gardens that influence children’s activity and play behaviour patterns towards environmental learning? RQ4: What are the possible competences of children
RO2: To investigate the children’s performances on ecological literacy in home gardens when engaging with their everyday ecology
12
• Less attention has given
to explore the children’s understanding of matter plants and animals and other physical elements within their home gardens in Malaysia.
when experiencing their everyday ecology?
Perceptions
RQ5: What are the children’s perceptions and preferences on home gardens environment and environmental learning?
RO3: To analyse the perceptions of children on home gardens ecosystems through the process of interaction for environmental learning
9. Literature Review
9.1 Interaction of children in everyday landscapes
Traditionally, outdoor environment has become a place where children most of
their childhood lives for play that foster their skills and thoughts (Kellert, 2005b), and
contribute to their physical, social and cognitive development (Pellegrini, 2009; Hart,
1993). Children perceive the environment as dynamic, interesting and challenging
place for adventure, exploration (Kyttä, 2003), manipulation (Jansson, Sundevall, &
Wales, 2016; Moore, 1989) and discovery that inspires them to be physically active
and to support learning.
9.1.1 Children and Place relationships
Outdoor environment or outdoor spaces, whether virtual or physical, can have
a significant impact on play and learning. Outdoor environment is fundamental to
childhood and supports the development of outdoor learning that leads to connect them
to the natural world. Nonetheless, the rich, sensory diversity, variability of natural
environment (Kellert, 2002) are not only support children’s own investigation
(Fjortoft, 2004), therefore, provides an ideal context for them in which the
development of knowledge, concepts and skills. The child-place relationship is
important to indicate the perception, preference and action of children in the
13
environment, thus, to understand better environment that optimize the children’s play
and learning.
9.2 Outdoor Learning Environment
9.2.1 Children’s play as Learning Play has been defined in various definitions to the study of children in the
outdoor environments. Play is associated with fun, passionate, spontaneous (Piaget,
2007), valuable as an enjoyable activity; it is also a process through which children
learn without being controlled or instructed by adults. This is because the activity is
more concern by children rather than the outcomes (Nor Fadzila Aziz; Ismail Said,
2016). Experience of children in outdoor involves in doing, exploring and discovering
(Malone & Tranter, 2003b). Children perceived environment as a place for play and
learning. Children has their own desire of learning and use their thoughts on how the
world works. Play with nature gives opportunity for children appreciate and discover
the natural elements while playing among the trees, hiding, and having secret place.
Through spontaneous, open-ended, and play in natural surroundings offer various
learning opportunities for children to observe, classify, explore, and interpret the
phenomena around them. Children are preferred natural environment in properties of
plants and animals as well as topography and microclimate. In parallel to Veselinovska
et. al. (2010), children have daily opportunity to explore living organisms, soil and
water in their environment in which they develop the understanding of their world and
other species. Children has their own desire to play, learn and figure out how the world
works.
9.2.2 Literacy of Children on Ecological System
Fundamental ecology is the basis for children to understand the relations and
interactions between plants, animals and its physical environment. For example,
children know the bees are more attracted to flowers with bright colour such as yellow
and orange where the bees collect the pollen or nectar as a food source. This shows
that children have the ability to understand the natural systems that offer diverse
elements on earth possible, known as ecological literacy. The natural environment
affords to reconnect children to natural systems with deep sense of place and
14
understand of their surroundings as well as support environmental learning. Ecological
literacy is reflecting to children’s way of thinking that emphasize relationships,
connectedness and setting. For instance, children are able to understand a water strider
by exploring both its own characteristics as well as its interaction with other habitats.
In other words, ecological literacy helps the children to build relationships and apply
their understanding in the real-world context.
10. Theoretical Framework
In recent years there has been a growing interest of play in outdoor
environment as both needs and rights of children, where they can explore and
experience natural elements and phenomena of their lives. Play is a foundation and has
a central role in promoting children’s learning and development (Bredikyte, 2011;
Pellegrini & Smith, 1998). Children’s preferences to engage with active play in
particular settings influenced by their psychological affection and distinction
experiences with the settings (Andel 1990; Min, 2006). There are evidences of positive
impact of play on obtaining academic knowledge and skills. Previous studies in
learning and development reveal that play in outdoor does not prevent realistic
learning (Fromberg and Bergen, 2002), however, play contributes to learning. The best
environments for children are those which are developed on the basis of children’s
natural needs, taking into account the outdoor play cooperate into learning in different
domains including physical, cognitive and social play. Children favoured play in the
outdoor environment with varied physical elements, high degree of challenges, taking
risks and complexity (Casey, 2007; Fjortoft, 2001). The richness and diverse of
outdoor environment offers more opportunities for exploration, discovery and learning
corresponding to behavioural patterns and preferences (Moore and Wong, 1997) for
children to gain knowledge about the world they live (Christensen, 2000). Therefore,
children that spent significant time in nature show a greater commitment to protect the
nature (Chawla, 2007) and know better about the environment in which develops the
children to gain knowledge, values and concern, motivate and commit to participate
in the environment they live. Therefore, playing in nature helps children to obtain
satisfaction and contribute to their environmental understanding and experience. This
is known as environmental learning.
15
Furthermore, to meet the needs for environmental understanding and children’s
experiences of play and learning in natural landscapes, the landscape setting should be
child-friendly environment. The landscape setting or geographic place in which people
live is important because people-place are interrelated. The place-based approach is
being used to reconnect the children with the place, that is home gardens in the rural
environment. Place-based approach applied for children where they are able to learn
across the subject matter.
The physical environment should afford the diversity of nature, the availability
of elements, challenging and complexity. The way of the environment is configured
influences the children behaviour and attitudes (e.g. feel, act, and behave). For
instance, the home gardens allow children to be freely active, sense of control to access
their favourite places and affords them for having various activities for play without
adults intervention (Chatterjee, 2005). Reconnecting children to the natural
environment must involve through hands-on multi-sensory experience in nature
(Freuder, 2006), thus promotes ecological literacy in children’s outdoor play
environment. Research has revealed the way in which children can learn especially
through play is strongly influenced by nature, the availability of natural elements (e.g.
Moore & Wong, 1997) and accessibility (e.g. Gundersen et al., 2016). For example,
the environment provide space for children to run, climb, jump, and observe on
particular natural elements. Inasmuch, this will capture the behavioural patterns of
children and their perceptions on play activities.
11. Underpinnings
The underpinning of this study will be focused on (1) Human-Nature Interaction
towards environmental values by Kellert (2002) and Bloom Taxonomy (1956), (2)
theory related to children’s play and learning including Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive
Development and Play (1972), (3) theories related to the development of
environmental competence including Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Developmental
Psychological Theory (1979) and Ecological Perceptual Psychological Theory by
Gibson (1979).
16
11.1 Theory of Human-Nature Interaction
The physical factors of an environment are associated with the availability of
natural elements which offer diverse functions and opportunities for children’s play
(Chawla and Moore, 2003). Children’s experience of nature is broadly perceived
through direct contact with indirect contact of learning process. The children’s
perception and action requires linking into three levels of experiences; (1) cognitive,
(2) affective and (3) evaluative with varying modes of experiential learning in
childhood development (Kellert, 2002). Cognitive development is associated with
children’s formation of thinking and problem-solving skills, from basic understanding
of facts and terms to complex levels that are creating categories, classifying systems
and identifying relationships. Affective is an ability and attitude of children to receive
and respond to information and situations in which involves willingness, sensitivity or
sensibility to interact with the elements in nature. While, evaluative is an ability of
children on performances and behaviour in the nature through imitating, manipulating,
precision, articulation or naturalization These levels of nature experiences emerged
into typology of nine basic values of nature. The values are classified into (1) aesthetic,
(2) dominionistic, (3) humanistic, (4) moralistic, (5) naturalistic, (6) negativistic, (7)
ecologistic-scientific, (8) symbolistic and (9) utilitarian based on children’s perception
and action in various environment. Thus, this typology associated with the child’s
experience of nature serve as stimulation for learning and development (Kellert, 2002).
11.2 Theory related to children’s play and learning
The underpinning of this study will be focused on a comprehensive theory
about nature and human intelligence development created by Jean Piaget, also known
as developmental stage theory. The theory deals with the nature knowledge and how
the human, that is children come to acquire, construct and use it. According to Piaget
(1972) believed that there are two key processes; 1) assimilation in which children
form new knowledge and experience and 2) accommodation of those into the child’s
existing internal organised patterns of thought and behaviour, known as schemas. It
means children’s way of organizing knowledge to understand and respond to
17
situations. For instance, children might have schema about pluck a fruit on the tree.
The schema is a stored form of the pattern of behaviour which includes looking at the
properties of tree, climbing the tree, pick ripe fruits and eating as well as sharing with
peers. This is how the children retrieve schema from memory and apply it to the
situation. Piaget emphasized the importance of schemas in cognitive development and
describe how children developed and acquired, therefore play is fundamental to
cognitive development. Piaget’s theory of play helps the children to develop their
understanding on what actions they can take in different situations and the effects of
their actions. Moreover, below can related to the theory of Piaget; 1) Children learning
through play. Play provides opportunities for exploration, experimentation and
manipulation that are essential for constructing knowledge. Learning through play
promotes the development of social, emotional and intellectual abilities of a child. It
is through play that children develop their imagination and creativity. Secondly,
children construct knowledge. They observe, compare, ask questions and discover
answers. Knowledge is constructed as a result of dynamic interactions between the
individual and the physical and social environments. In a sense, the child discovers
knowledge through active experimentation, which eventually sometimes leads to
“constructive errors” that are equally necessary to mental development.
11.3 Theory related to children’s environmental competence
The competence is an essential quality of development that children need to
develop to become capable adults (Taylor, 2013). In fact, children are able to form
their capabilities that allow them to navigate the world. Children seek for opportunities
where they can show their competence. In other words, competence has been emerged
from psychology research in satisfying human functioning (Sternberg & Kolligan,
1990). It contributes to children to adapt and function well in the environment as well
as achieve desired outcomes. These psychological outcomes are recurring from
person-environment experiences (Chawla & Heft, 2002).
The Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory is focused on the quality and
context of the system of relationship that form their environment affect children’s
growth and development. The theory emphasizes on the complex layers of
environment; (1) microsystem refer to immediate environment that children live in
18
(e.g. home, school, neighbourhood), (2) mesosystem refers to the connection between
home and neighbourhood, (3) exosystem is defined as a system of individual in which
children do not function directly, however, impact the children’s development (e.g.
parent workplace schedule), (4) macrosystems are considered the outmost layer in
child’s development, comprised of cultural values, customs, and laws. It also refers to
the prevalent models that still influence over the children throughout the interaction of
microsystems, mesosystems and exosystems.
James J. Gibson has developed a theory on ecological perceptual psychology
which refer to person-environment relationship as immediate concept and particularly
based on practical activity. Gibson’s perceptual psychology is based on a description
of stimulus information through human senses which forms their ecological reality.
The sensory information is made by multisensory perceptions: sight, hear, touch, smell
and taste. Perception is fundamental in this framework and cannot be separated from
the intentional activity which it is connected. Besides, accessibility and movement
reveal more information about the environment. “We must perceive to be able to move
around, and we must move around to be able to perceive” (Gibson, 1979, p.223).
Hence, it is clearly shows that perception and mobility is closely connected. Perception
is further developed by Gibson on the affordances of an environment. Perception and
action are interrelated which through action, a person can reveal new affordances and
through perception affordances create new action (Kyttä, 2003).
12. Scope of Study and Variables
The study focuses on investigating the depth of ecological literacy in children
within their everyday landscape in rural environment - home gardens. The home
gardens environment properties that influenced the children’s physical, cognitive and
social in play and learning development. The key to this ‘hidden competence’ is the
amount of knowledge and experience of children having in the particular domain. In
order to accomplish the objectives, the study will investigate the children’s literacy for
environmental learning based on their perceptions and actions when they experience
their immediate environment. Refer to Figure 2.
19
The unit analysis is the middle childhood children, aged between 7-12 years
old live in the rural environment. Middle children engage with spaces in most of their
active free-play and the influences on their choice of location and activity are largely
undiscovered by adults (Veitch et. al, 2006). There is a need to better understanding
of where and how children engage, are important because it may inform opportunities
to promote children’s environmental learning. Therefore, children have develop their
own abilities to understand the environment where they form basic ideas (Kellert,
2005b) to better informed about nature and begin to address more complex concepts
(Veselinovska, Petrovska, & Zivanovic, 2010; White, 2004a) such as living of species.
Thus, children know how to fit themselves in the environment. According to Piaget’s
theory of cognitive development stages, the middle childhood children begin to show
signs of using logical thinking, analysing, recall, ability to recognize their own
thoughts and perceptions that is known as concrete-operational stage (McDevitt and
Ormrod, 2002). During middle childhood, the local natural setting provides many
chances for them to curious, explore, discover, imagine, and create (Kellert, 2005b).
Hence, increases the children’s way of knowledge by allowing them advance in their
thinking and reasoning skills. For example, children able to describe that the
earthworm do not need legs to move because it has muscle. Moreover, this is a phase
where children learn to act and think beyond a conception of the universe. Therefore,
children are able to take their point of view, and understand a part or the whole
relationship and classification. This shows that they have the ability to expand their
experiences, perceptions, curiosity and feelings as they use the outdoor environment
extensively (Chawla, 1992; Kellert, 2002), because they have their own sense of
control; children can increase their freedom to be outside without adults’ supervision.
Importantly, children perceived play and learning in the outdoor environments offer
various exciting and challenging elements, provide them the opportunity to choose,
make decision, experiment, imagine and create new things.
20
Figure 2: Research Variables
21
13. Significance of Study
The study is significant to response to the problem statement and research gap
that have been mentioned earlier in the research proposal:
i. The study will add the body of knowledge on home gardens ecosystems
afford children’s performances in conception, perception, and action
through direct experiences.
ii. In the aspect of literacy, this will reveal the depth of ecological
knowledge, attributes and key dimensions that support children’s
environmental learning within their space domains.
iii. From the thematic analysis study, this will provide evidence on the
importance of children engagement with outdoor environment leading
to environmental learning and children’s functioning; physically,
cognitively and socially.
iv. From the children’s performances towards environmental learning in
the home gardens environment as an assessment model for ecological
literacy for children on learning to know, learning to be, learning to do
and learning to live together.
14. Research Design
To achieve the aim of the study, therefore, this research will investigate the
understanding of children on ecological system of home gardens. This is
environmental learning (e.g. White, 2004; Malone & Tranter, 2003a). An assessment
model for ecological literacy for children on learning to know, learning to be, learning
to do and learning to live together (Draft Global Issues Pilot August, 2011) will be
introduced to educators. Engaging children with natural elements through direct
experience can sharpen their observation, exploration and discovery in the
environment which reveals any possible actions, behaviour and perception of children.
This research also investigate the importance of physical environmental properties (i.e.
natural elements, places characteristics) (Rissotto & Tonucci, 2002) on children’s
environmental learning (Tidball & Krasny, 2011). Therefore, this study observes and
documents on children’s performances with the elements of home gardens ecosystems.
The performances are elicited through children’s situated perceptions (i.e. preferences
22
and attitudes) (Ewert, Place, & Sibthorp, 2005) and their actions (i.e. activity ,
behaviour and movement pattern) (Laaksoharju, Rappe, & Kaivola, 2012) on ecology.
Apart of the specific literacy of children on ecological system in home gardens, the
accessibility (Shamsuddin & Said, 2008) to these spaces also become a part of
important consideration in this study.
The physical environmental elements of home gardens in rural environment are
categorized into animal, plant, topography and microclimate while the physical
environmental features are locations, space connectivity and physical characteristics.
The data will be obtained through participatory observation, field notes, photographs
and video recording. Therefore, the data will be analysed using ArcGIS for place
mapping (Broberg, Kyttä, & Fagerholm, 2013) and Nvivo for coding and analysis
(Finn, 2015).
In addition, the data of overt and covert actions will be collected. The field
observation and photograph will be elicited for children’s activities and performances
in motoric and sensorial actions when they engage with nature elements. ArcGIS will
be used for behavioural mapping to determine how children use the spaces that are
their actions and tracking their movements in particular spaces. Examples including
running in open field to catch grasshopper and cricket and climbing tree at home yard
to search bird nests. Therefore, children’s good knowledge on nature elements and
preferences will be obtained from semi-structured interview and voice recording.
Children’s expression will be analysed from drawings where children apply their
understanding of home gardens ecosystems. These methods need to be conducted to
investigate the depth of children’s literacy on ecological system of home gardens in
rural environment in Malaysia. Table 2 shows the methods and tools used to conduct
the research.
Table 3: Research Framework
Research Objectives
Determinant Variables Overt/ Covert Methods Tools
RO1 (Environment)
Properties of home gardens
• Physical environmental elements - Animal - Plant - Topography - Microclimate
• Physical environmental quality - Location - Space characteristics - Space connectivity
• Participant Observation • Field Notes • Photograph • Video recording
• Mapping • Field Notes
ArcGIS
Nvivo
(Ecology)
Relations between physical elements and features
• Ecological • quality
- Connectivity - Relationships
RO2 (Action)
Behavioral patterns and performances
• Opportunities for outdoor play and learning - Activities - Movement - Social interaction
Overt • Field notes • Mapping • Photograph •
ArcGIS
RO3 Perception responses
(Perceptual) • Place preferences • Perception of environmental
learning - Ways of thinking
Covert • Semi-structured interview • Voice recording • Drawing
15. Anticipate Findings
The study will reveal the factors of children’s literacy that influence the
performance for environmental learning. Thus, the anticipated findings are as follows:
i. Direct experiences with elements of home gardens ecological system enhance
children’s experiential learning in which simultaneously develop their
competence in knowledge, skills and attitudes toward environmental learning.
ii. Conducting a module for outdoor learning that supports children’s knowledge and
skills that not only learning about the environment but also learning for and
learning in the environment. The module begins with the heterogeneous groups of
children (Metz, 2004) working together guided by instructors.
iii. The home gardens in rural environment are highly natural diversity and may
become ideal for environmental learning that is children’s needs and desires.
Children who live in the home gardens environment explore and perceive more
diverse elements and variety of activities which perform them in motoric and
sensorial actions. This expected finding may reveal a better understanding the
children’s play and way of thinking.
At the end of this research, the expected result of this study will be developed
into an assessment model for ecological literacy for children’s environmental learning
on learning to know, learning to be, learning to do and learning to live together (Draft
Global Issues Pilot August, 2011) and could be used for further studies. Children learn
about elements of the local ecology and their shared role in it, which, in turn,
heightened their sense of environmental competency. It is significant to identify if
there are certain factors that influence the development of children’s competence for
environmental learning, especially in the outdoor environment, that is home gardens.
This study seeks to determine the quality of the home gardens, which is likely to
support the development of children’s competence (Duerden & Witt, 2010) in
ecological system. These findings will help us to understand the importance of the
home gardens for children’s environmental learning from a more holistic perspective.
25
16. Conclusion
The findings suggest that the home gardens setting in the rural environment
become as an extension for children to develop their literacy on ecological system and
support their actions; physically, cognitively and socially. The children perceived the
home gardens as an open-ended laboratory because there are no boundaries for
exploration. The availability of the natural resources in their home gardens is
associated for children’s learning and experiences. This indicates that home gardens
are affording the natural elements including plant, animal, topography and
microclimate towards children’s sensory stimulation and responses through
experiences and exploration to understand more about the world they live in. Thus,
children perceived their home gardens as a place for them to have sense of control to
discover their own play and knowledge. This interaction inspired the children to extend
their knowledge about their world including noticing, wondering, finding challenges,
problem solving and taking risks through their own research. It means that the home
gardens setting is directly influencing the children’s perceptions and actions.
Nevertheless, home gardens elucidate the importance of ideational resources for the
initiation of learning activities. From pilot study, researcher had a glimpse of
children’s interaction and experiences and the significance of these experiences need
a further investigation. Therefore, bringing children closer to nature, that is their home
gardens environment reveal that children have more enthusiasm to discover than fear
of not succeeding in various aspects. Children benefit from nature contacts that boost
their growth and learning development. However, it is in the hands of adults to
preserve the rights and opportunities of children to encounter nature.
26
Figure 3: Flow Chart Diagram
• The home gardens in rural environment can be highly diverse, and become ideal for environmental learning that is children’s needs and desires. This expected finding reveals a better understanding the children’s way of
learning through experiential and direct engagement.• Conducting a module for outdoor learning that supports children’s knowledge and skills that not only learning
about the environment but also learning for and learning in the environment. The module begins with the heterogeneous groups of children (Metz, 2004) working together guided by instructors. (conducting in dyads
allow collaboration and distribution of the intellectual load, and maximizes the responsibility and control of the individual)
• Direct experiences with elements of an ecological system enhance children’s learning skills including exploration, autonomy, curiosity and sense of responsibility (e.g. Ferreira, Cruz, & Pitarma, 2016), and
simultaneously develop their competence for environmental learning.
Literature Review
Literacy of Children on Ecological Systems and Environmental Learning in Home Garden
Data Collection
Preliminary Study at Kampung Jawa Ulu,
Pontian, Johor
Actual Study
Identify factors that influence the literacy of
children on home gardens ecosystems through
participant observation, field notes and mapping
Examine the children’s competence on
performances in on ecological literacy in home
gardens when engaging with their everyday ecology
Analyse the perceptions of children on home gardens ecosystems using semi-
structured interviews, drawings, photo-taking and
discussion
Data Analysis
• ArcGIS uses for children’s place and behavioural mapping and Nvivo uses for coding and content
analysis
Findings and Discussion
Data Analysis
• Content Analysis
Interaction of children in everyday landscape; that is home garden
i) Children-Place relationship
Outdoor learning environmenti) Children’s play as learning
ii) Literacy of children on ecological system
17. Research Schedule
Stage of Study
Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mac Apr May June Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mac Apr May June Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mac Apr May June Jul AugProposal Defense 28th Proposal Literature ReviewProgress Presentation 26th 28thProblem Statement, Aim & ObjectivesPilot Study 6thConference 1: UGM Colloquium 2018, Yogyakarta
22nd
Conference 2: 2nd International Conference Children Environment (ICCE) 2018, Surakarta
21st-22nd
MethodologyData Collection &Site SurveyConference 3: UKM Conference 2018Publication 1Conference 4: IPA 2020 in Jaipur Data Analysis & IntepretationFinding & DiscussionPublication 2Publication 3Thesis WritingThesis SubmissionViva Voce (Thesis Defense)
2017 2018 2019 2020Semester I Semester II Semester III Semester IV Semester V Semester VI
18. References:
Broberg, A., Kyttä, M., & Fagerholm, N. (2013). Child-friendly urban structures:
Bullerby revisited. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 35, 110–120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.06.001
Capra, F. (2006). The web of life: a new scientific understanding of living systems.
São Paulo: Cultri. Teia.
Casey, T. (2007). Environments for Outdoor Play: A Practical Guide to Making
Spaces for Children.
Chatterjee, S. (2005). Children’s Friendship with Place: A Conceptual Inquiry.
Children, Youth and Environments, 15(1), 1–26. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.15.1.0001
Chawla, L., & Heft, H. (2002). Children’s competence and the ecology of
communities: A functional approach to the evaluation of participation. Journal
of Environmental Psychology, 22(1–2), 201–216.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2002.0244
Chawla, L., 2007. Childhood experiences associated with care for the natural world: a
theoretical framework for empirical results. Children, Youth and Environ- ments
17, 144e170.
Children and Nature. (2013).
Christensen, P., & James, A. (2000). Research with children: Perspectives and
practices. Falmer Press. Taylor & Francis Group.
https://doi.org/doi:10.4324/9780203964576
Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Introduction: Identity and the natural
environment. Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological
Significance of Nature.
Cobb, E., & Mead, M. (1977). The Ecology of Imagination in Childhood. United
State: Columbia University Press.
Corsino, P. (2006). Six-year-olds and areas of knowledge. In Ministry of Education.
Elementary School of nine years: guidelines for the inclusion of six-year-old
children. Secretariat of Basic Education. Department of Early Childhood
Education and Elementary Education. Brasília: FNDE: Estação Gráfica.
Courchamp, F., Dunne, J. A., Le Maho, Y., May, R. M., Thébaud, C., & Hochberg,
M. E. (2015). Fundamental ecology is fundamental. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution, 30(1), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.11.005
29
de Brito Miranda, A. C., Jófili, Z., & dos Anjos Carneiro-Leão, A. M. (2016).
Ecological literacy – preparing children for the twenty-first century. Early Child
Development and Care, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1226353
Draft Global Issues Pilot August. (2011). What is Ecological Literacy ?, (August), 1–
18.
Duerden, M. D., & Witt, P. A. (2010). The impact of direct and indirect experiences
on the development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 379–392.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.03.007
Ewert, A., Place, G., & Sibthorp, J. (2005). Early-life outdoor experiences and an
individual’s environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences, 27(3), 225–239.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400590930853
Ferreira, M. E., Cruz, C., & Pitarma, R. (2016). Teaching ecology to children of
preschool education to instill environmentally friendly behaviour. International
Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(12), 5619–5632.
Finn, R. (2015). The Affordances of Place: Implications of Ecological Psychology
for. (University of Southern Queensland, Australia.
Fjortoft, I. (2001). The Natural Environment as a Playground for Children: The
Impact of Outdoor Play Activities in Pre-Primary School Children. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 111–117.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012576913074
Fjortoft, I. (2004). Landscape as Playscape : The Effects of Natural Environments on
Children ’ s Play and Motor Development. Children, Youth and Environments,
14(2), 21–44. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.14.2.0021
Freuder, T. G. (2006). Designing for the Future : Promoting Ecoliteracy in Children
’ s Outdoor Play Environments.
Gordon, A. & Browne, K. (2015). Play and the Learning Environment. Naeyc (Vol.
10). Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-
data/53567_ch_10.pdf%5Cnwww.safepub.com/gordonbiddle
Gundersen, V., Skår, M., O’Brien, L., Wold, L. C., & Follo, G. (2016). Children and
nearby nature: A nationwide parental survey from Norway. Urban Forestry and
Urban Greening, 17, 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.04.002
Jansson, M., Sundevall, E., & Wales, M. (2016). The role of green spaces and their
30
management in a child-friendly urban village. Urban Forestry and Urban
Greening, 18, 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.014
Kellert, S. R. (2002). Experiencing nature: Affective, cognitive, and evaluative
development in children. (P. H. Kahn & S. R. Kellert, Eds.), Children and
nature: Psychological, sociocultural, and evolutionary investigations.
Cambridge: Pres, MA: MIT.
Kellert, S. R. (2005a). Building for Life: Designing and Understanding the Human-
Nature Connection. IslandPress.
Kellert, S. R. (2005b). Building for Life Designing and Understanding the Human-
Nature Connection. Nature and Childhood Development, 63–89. Retrieved from
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Building+f+o
+r+Life#9
Kyttä, M. (2002). AFFORDANCES OF CHILDREN’S ENVIRONMENTS IN THE
CONTEXT OF CITIES, SMALL TOWNS, SUBURBS AND RURAL
VILLAGES IN FINLAND AND BELARUS. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 22(1–2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0249
Kyttä, M. (2003). Children in outdoor contexts.
Laaksoharju, T., Rappe, E., & Kaivola, T. (2012). Garden affordances for social
learning, play, and for building nature-child relationship. Urban Forestry and
Urban Greening, 11(2), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.01.003
Lanouette, K. A., Wart, S. Van, & Parikh, T. S. (2016). Supporting Elementary
Students’ Science Learning Through Data Modeling and Interactive Mapping in
Local Spaces. Transforming Learning. Empowering Learners: The
International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS), 570–577.
Leach, J., Driver, R., Scott, P., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2007). Children’s ideas about
ecology 1: Theoretical background, design and methodology. International
Journal of Science Education, 17(6), 721–732.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069950170604
Lester, S., & Moudsley, M. (2006). Play naturally: A Review of Children’s Natural
Play. The Children’s Play, 105.
Lima, E.C. (1991). The activity of the Child in the Pre-School Age. In M. C. Conholato
(coord.), The game and the construction to the knowledge in the Preschool (pp.
17-21). São Paulo: Série Ideias, 10. FDE.
Maitland, C., Stratton, G., Foster, S., Braham, R., & Rosenberg, M. (2014). The
31
dynamic family home: A qualitative exploration of physical environmental
influences on children’s sedentary behaviour and physical activity within the
home space. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical
Activity, 11(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-014-0157-1
Malone, K., & Tranter, P. (2003a). Children’s Environmental Learning and the Use,
Design and Management of Schoolgrounds. Children, Youth and Environments,
13(2), 87–137. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.13.2.0087
Malone, K., & Tranter, P. J. (2003b). School Grounds as Sites for Learning: Making
the most of environmental opportunities. Environmental Education Research,
9(3), 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620303459
Malone, K. 2007. “The Bubble-Wrap Generation: Children Growing up in Walled
Gardens.” Environmental Education Research 13 (4): 513–527.
Malone, K. 2008. “Every Experience Matters: An Evidence Based Research Report
on the Role of Learning outside the Classroom for Children’s Whole Development
from Birth to Eighteen Years.” Report commissioned by Farming and
Countryside Education for UK Department Children, School and Families,
Wollongong, Australia. Accessed December 28 2015. http://www.face-
online.org.uk/docman/news/every-experience-matters/download
Maynard, T., & Waters, J. (2007). Learning in the outdoor environment: a missed
opportunity? Early Years, 27(3), 255–265.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09575140701594400
Metz, K. E. (2004). Children’s Understanding of Scientific Inquiry: Their
Conceptualization of Uncertainty in Investigations of Their Own Design.
Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 219–290.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2202
Moore, R. C. (1997). The Need for Nature: A Childhood Right. Social Justice, 24(3),
203–220. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/29767032%5Cnhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2976703
2?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents%5Cnhttp://about.jstor.org/terms
Murtaza, K. F. (2011). Developing Child Friendly Environment in Early Childhood
Education Classrooms in Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research
in Business and Social Sciences, 1(3), 11. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss.v1i3.52
32
Nor Fadzila Aziz; Ismail Said. (2016). Outdoor Environments as Children’s Play
Spaces: Playground Affordances. Play and Recreation, Health and Wellbeing:
Geographies of Children and Young People, 9, 601–619.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-96-5_7-1
Norðdahl, K., & Einarsdóttir, J. (2014). Children’s views and preferences regarding
their outdoor environment. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor
Learning, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2014.896746
Pellegrini, A. D., & Smith, P. K. (1998). Physical Activity Play: The Nature and
Function of a Neglected Aspect of Play. Child Development, 69(3), 577–598.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06226.x
Rezasoltani, M., & Said, I. (2012). Methods for Evaluating Responses of Children
with Outdoor Environments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 49,
39–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.07.004
Rios, C., & Menezes, I. (2017). ‘I saw a magical garden with flowers that people
could not damage!’: children’s visions of nature and of learning about nature in
and out of school. Environmental Education Research, 23(10), 1402–1413.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1325450
Rissotto, A., & Tonucci, F. (2002). Freedom of movement and environmental
knowledge in elementary school children. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 22(1), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2002.0243
Rivet, A. E., & Krajcik, J. S. (2008). Contextualizing Instruction: Leveraging
Students’ Prior Knowledge and Experiences to Foster Understanding of Middle
School Science. JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, 45(1),
79–100. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20203
Rivkin, Mary S. (1990). The Great Outdoors: Restoring Children's Rights to Play
Outside. National Association for the Education of Young Children, Washington,
D.C.
Said, I. (2007). Evaluating the Affordances of Fishing Village Pertaining to
Children’s Functioning. Landscape, 9(3), 27–43.
Shamsuddin, M. S. Bin, & Said, I. (2008). Middle Childhood Children Interaction
with Home and Neighborhood Gardens in Urban and Rural Setting. 2nd
International Conference on Built Environment in Developing Countries, 1976–
1990.
Tidball, K. G., & Krasny, M. E. (2011). Toward an ecology of environmental
33
education and learning. Ecosphere, 2(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES10-
00153.1
Ünal, C., & Nan, H. Z. (2010). Students’ perceptions of a situated learning
environment. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 2171–
2175). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.301
Veitch, J., Bagley, S., Ball, K., & Salmon, J. (2006). Where do children usually play?
A qualitative study of parents’ perceptions of influences on children’s active
free-play. Health & Place, 12(4), 383–393.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2005.02.009
Veselinovska, S. S., Petrovska, S., & Zivanovic, J. (2010). How to help children
understand and respect nature? In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
(Vol. 2, pp. 2244–2247). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.316
Wake, S. J., & Eames, C. (2013). Developing an “ecology of learning” within a
school sustainability co-design project with children in New Zealand. Local
Environment, 18(3), 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2012.748723
Waller, T., Sandseter, E. B. H., Wyver, S., Ärlemalm-Hagsér, E., & Maynard, T.
(2010). The dynamics of early childhood spaces: Opportunities for outdoor
play? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18(4), 437–443.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2010.525917
Wheway, R. (2015). Opportunities for free play. International Journal of Play, 4(3),
270–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/21594937.2015.1106048
White, R. (2004a). INTERACTION WITH NATURE DURING THE MIDDLE
YEARS: ITS IMPORTANCE TO CHILDREN’S DEVELOPMENT &
NATURE’S FUTURE. White Hutchinson Leisure & Learning Group, 1–13.
White, R. (2004b). Young Children’ s Relationship with Nature: Its Importance to
Children ’ s Development & the Earth’s Future. Retrieved from
www.childrenandnature.org/uploads/White_YoungChildren.pdf
Wood-Robinson, C. (1991). Young people’s ideas about plants. Studies in Science
Education, 19(1), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269108559995
Worth, K. (2010). Science in early childhood classrooms: Content and process. Early
Childhood Research and Practice, Collected Papers from the SEED (STEM in
Early Education and Development) Conference, 10, 1–118. Retrieved from
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/beyond/seed/worth.html
34
