The Earth Day generation
By Judy Lowe | 04.22.09
The current generation of schoolchildren has grown up with Earth Day. They’ve celebrated it at school and often at home. It’s spawned a regular part of their school curriculum as they’re taught about recycling, organic gardening, endangered species, pollution, solar and other types of renewable energy, as well as everyday steps they and their families can take. And many have embraced this wholeheartedly.
Does this make today’s kids more knowledgeable about geoscience and environmental issues? More aware of global environmental issues? More likely to take steps that they feel will help protect and improve the world? More willing to help find solutions to possible environmental challenges of the future?
Some answers are found in a survey and a study released in time for Earth Day.
As you might expect, most high school students worldwide are familiar with the common environmental issues — air pollution, energy shortages, and extinction of plants and animals. However — and this may come as a surprise — there’s little correlation between students feeling responsible for the environment and how proficient they are in environmental science.
Actually, the ones who demonstrate the least environmental knowledge are the most optimistic (often wildly so) about the solutions to problems that may be facing the earth over the next two decades.
So says a study (”Green at 15?”) funded by the National Science Foundation. Click here to download a free PDF of the study, which assessed the environmental awareness, attitudes, and science expertise of 15-year-olds in 57 countries.
In Des Moines, Iowa ( (the state in which President Obama will spend part of Earth Day and reportedly encourage more renewable energy, especially wind power), 140 middle schoolers were asked about their attitudes toward the environment and what actions they or their families take.
The 10-to-12-year-olds surveyed over the past six months at Merrill Middle School love to recycle. They make sure their families do it and even take the time to pull recyclables from regular trash and put them in the proper bins.
But only 26 percent unplug computers and television sets when they’re not in use to save electricity. Still, a majority turn off the water when they’re brushing their teeth, and more than 60 percent say their family eats at least some local food (easier, of course, for students in the farm belt).
It’s easy for adults to dismiss youthful environmental enthusiasm and efforts, but others consider it a good base for increasing knowledge. One student writes in an essay quoted in “Growing Up Green,” the Iowa report: “I think in order to make the country more aware of the impact it’s leaving, schools need to do more thinking about how to teach kids about the environment. If everyone becomes more aware, the country will be much ‘greener.’ ”
And that’s an issue that “Green at 15″ also embraces: finding the best way to teach environmental science to the next generation.
Bonus Earth Day question: Which president created the Environmental Protection Agency?
<< The Boston Marathon goes green and so do other road races | MainComments
3. Vince | 04.22.09
This is a great post. I think that educating the children is what it will take to create a culture and society that respects the Earth. This is the best long-term strategy. Earth Day should be everyday, it is good that there is at least one day to spread awareness. Here are some suggestions on what you can do to help the Earth: http://www.toptentopten.com/topten/things+to+do+on+earth+day You can add your own suggestions.
4. Chris | 04.22.09
Joshua, you are out-of-date in your knowledge of the effect of unplugging. More recent studies have shown that the energy costs of leaving computer on and plugged in far outweigh the energy cost of start-up. Now, this does not mean that if you get up to go to the bathroom you should turn your computer off. But if you are leaving it off for eight hours or more (overnight while sleeping or while away at school or work) it should be turned off and unplugged. Connected appliances such as speakers, printers, scanners, etc. Should also be unplugged when not in use as they continuously consume small quantities of energy.
As to your other point, if you haven’t explained the problem, how can you lay out the solutions in an intelligent way? And there are hundreds of websites that will lay out green activities for you without explaining the effects of carbon dioxide emissions, but without some knowledge of the extent of the problem, what is the motivation for seeking personal solutions?
5. Don | 04.23.09
“The report, a unique window into a broader national trend, includes an unprecedented survey of more than 140 students (nearly all of them ages 11 or 12) at Merrill Middle School in Des Moines, Iowa…”
The whole thing is a little ridiculous. 140 subjects is no where near unprecedented or statistically significant, let alone any indication of a “broader national trend. Even the article contradicts itself two graphs down (”Their experience is almost certainly not representative of all youth in the country. By finding out how these children live and think, we don’t learn what all youth think — we learn how young people nationwide can become more engaged in protecting the environment and what government entities, schools and communities can do to make it possible.”)
Test results like: “Fully 53% of the students said that environmental issues have been a focus of the curriculum in at least one of their classes. ”
LOL - Well, yeh.
Teaching conservation to kids is awesome. My teachers were teaching conservation 40 years ago, as were my grandparents (back then they called it “thrifty.”). Back then it was connected to biology and chemistry, meaning we actually had scientific learning going on along side the ecology. Now the whole thing is social indoctrination with no substance.
Uber-green school successfully pushes a green agenda on impressionable young people. This is news? C’mon, guys - CSMonitor is better than that.
By the way, the links to the report in the linked article don’t work. This site is better:
6. editorial | 04.23.09
Hi Don,
I want to clarify that you’re quoting from the report, Growing Up Green, not from our blog post. I made it very clear that this was a *survey* of a limited number of kids at a particular school. (”… 140 middle schoolers were asked about their attitudes toward the environment and what actions they or their families take.”) It wasn’t a study at all, and we certainly didn’t claim that it was representative of kids in general or statistically representative. Nevertheless, it was interesting to me, and I wanted to mention it because my experience with kids that age is that it sounds pretty common for middle-class US kids.
Is it news? Well, blogs aren’t necessarily news. But kids’ attitudes toward the environment strike me as a good blog topic on Earth Day.
Also — as a warning to readers — the bad link you mention isn’t in our post, but in a site we had linked to. The URL in your comment doesn’t link directly to the site of the full report either, but, at this point, does include another link to a partial report.
7. James | 05.04.09
I feel it’s fantastic the next generation is growing up more aware of environmental and sustainability issues. Now we need to do a better job of discussing solutions, and encouraging youth to focus their creativity and passion on discovering and teaching us new solutions. We should help channel this enthusiasm into career decisions that will help them make a real difference; i.e., help them become decision-makers, for example, policy or engineering design decision-makers (http://www.design-impact.org/blog/2009/05/young-experimenters/).
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
2. Today’s Science Policy News for April, 23rd 2009 - Scientists & Engineers for America Action Fund | 04.23.09
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Joshua Cranmer | 04.22.09
There are two points on this article that I wish to make. The first is the claim that the least environmentally knowledgeable are the most optimistic. Keep in mind that most environmentalist talks tend to start out painting a picture of general environmental malaise, and it’s only after you wade through such a morass that they talk about solutions. So someone who listens or reads such material will overwhelmingly get a negative picture.
The other point is about methods of conservation. There are more than a few of these methods that would actually increase consumption. Take for example turning off computers: a heavily-used computer can use more power in start-up and shutdown sequences than merely letting it go into the low-power sleep mode. Another example is using local produce: transporting produce in bulk via rail uses much less emissions that transporting it in much smaller sizes in more energy-hungry trucks.