Art can be a valuable tool in environmental education practice and evaluation, especially among diverse audiences

Art is often representative of and inspired by nature, yet it is rarely used in environmental education (EE) programming. Making art is a stimulating activity that can help children who struggle in traditional academic settings connect meaningfully with new ideas and material. Evaluation with youth (especially young children) is often difficult and many students may find it easier to express themselves through art rather than words. Children's artwork can also be used to measure their knowledge of and feelings about a particular topic. This study explored the effects of using art in EE by incorporating both art-based and traditional EE programming in summer day camps. In particular, the authors sought to understand the potential value of including art in EE teaching and as an evaluation tool, as well as the impacts of art-based environmental education programming on the environmental orientations of demographically diverse youth.

The researchers collected data at three day camps in Athens, Georgia. Participants at one of the day camps received art-based EE programming, while those at another of the camps received traditional EE programming, and campers at a third day camp did not receive any EE programming (control group). All of the 285 campers in the study were aged 6-12 and attended one of the week-long day camps during the summer months (June and July) of 2010 or 2011. At the beginning and end of the week, campers at all three camps took the Children's Environmental Perceptions survey, which measured their affinity for nature and their awareness of environmental topics. The researchers used the Draw an Animal Test (DAT) and Draw an Ecosystem Test (DET) to measure ecological knowledge. The DAT asked participants to draw a favorite animal including its habitat and the things it needs to survive, and the DET asked participants to draw a familiar ecosystem that the child plays in regularly. Researchers performed statistical analysis on survey results. They assessed the drawings for the types of built and natural features, the sophistication of the habitat, and the range of ecosystem features, as well as how the drawings had evolved.

Researchers found that both of the EE day camp programs generated positive changes in awareness of environmental topics and ecological knowledge among campers, but not affinity for nature. These changes were similar across demographic groups despite coming to camp with differing levels of these measures based on age and race. Although none of the children in the study showed significant increases in their affinity for nature, the most visible change occurred in the non-EE camp. This could be because children who were already interested in environmental topics signed up for the camps with EE programming and children with less interest in the outdoors signed up for the camp without EE programming. Campers in the EE programs may have increased knowledge and awareness, but because they started out already fairly engaged with nature, there was less room for their affinity to grow.

There were no differences between the art or traditional EE programs in campers' awareness of environmental topics or affinity for nature. The researchers suggested that the program may have been too short for art-based learning to show a measurable impact. In addition, art-dominated programming may have excluded learners who prefer to learn in different ways. Even though art-based EE was not more effective overall than a more traditional approach, campers did not learn less about the environment when they were taught using art. Girls and campers from low-income backgrounds demonstrated the most enjoyment for the art-based methods and other studies have shown that they are also especially effective for children with disabilities or high anxiety levels.

The study had some limitations. Campers were not randomly assigned to programs and children who registered for the EE-based camp programs showed higher levels of nature awareness and affinity before starting the program. Campers enrolled in each camp had separate counselors who may have facilitated activities slightly differently for each group. Finally, some of the older campers resisted participating in the drawing activities and surveys at the end of camp because they didn't understand why it was necessary since they had already completed them once.

The authors recommend implementing art-based environmental education, which seems to be just as effective as traditional EE. In addition, art-based EE may help reach diverse populations and youth who may otherwise be left out of learning opportunities. Using art can also help practitioners to measure whether their program is achieving desired outcomes, and artwork may provide an engaging alternative to surveys for program evaluation.