Emancipatory Approach to EcoSchools Programming Leads to Better Student Experiences

EcoSchools is a formal environmental education program with a global reach. Implemented in 47 countries, EcoSchools is adaptable to multiple contexts, offering schools the freedom to design and implement the program in ways that meet the needs of the community. However, all schools participating in the EcoSchools program must form EcoTeams, which are composed of students and teachers charged with the task of implementing school-wide environmental management practices. EcoTeam initiatives and actions partly depend on the two different EE approaches primarily taken by schools. The emancipatory approach empowers students to develop learning goals and content and to construct their own learning experiences. This approach is student-centered, with teachers serving as process facilitators and guides. The instrumental approach, on the other hand, depends on teachers to drive the development of goals and learning content, giving students less power to guide their own learning. The authors hypothesized that the approach schools use to implement the EcoSchools program—an emancipatory approach, an instrumental approach, or some combination of the two—impacts program outcomes and student experiences with the program. This study focused on student perceptions of EcoSchools programs and how views differed based on the EE approach employed by the school.

The authors began their research by identifying the top EcoSchool programs in the Czech Republic. These programs were identified by the EcoSchools program coordinator based on implementation and outcome successes. Of the programs chosen, eight schools agreed to participate in the research. These schools spanned the spectrum in terms of their EcoSchool implementation approaches. Some used an emancipatory approach, others an instrumental approach, and others a combination of the two. Schools using the emancipatory approach encouraged voluntary program participation and allowed students autonomy in program design and direction. Schools using an instrumental approach mandated participation in the program and limited student autonomy. The authors conducted focus groups with student members of the EcoTeams at each of the schools in the study. The average student was 12-13 years old. The authors recorded and transcribed focus-group discussions and looked for trends in the dialogue. The focus groups were analyzed for themes and to develop a holistic understanding of each of the EcoTeams' program experiences.

Two prominent themes emerged from the focus-group discussions. First, students who actively participated on EcoTeams felt a sense of belonging and developed deep bonds with other EcoTeam members. Collectively, team members developed a strong environmental moral authority, feeling an obligation to combat the “wrongs” committed against the environment by their peers and to encourage the “right” behaviors. Second, the degree to which students identified with and felt ownership of the program varied based on three factors: (1) the degree of autonomy enjoyed by student members of the EcoTeams, (2) the types of activities implemented by the EcoTeams, and (3) whether EcoTeam participation was voluntary or mandatory.

The authors found that, in schools that mandated participation on EcoTeams and required the school community to comply with environmental-management initiatives, EcoTeam students felt unhappy with and disconnected from the program. Programs at these schools focused much time and effort on compliance tracking, which led to higher levels of conflict between EcoTeam members and peers. In schools that encouraged voluntary participation on EcoTeams and allowed team members some autonomy to develop actions, EcoTeam students expressed greater satisfaction with the program, but still experienced conflict with peers related to compliance with management initiatives. In schools where EcoTeam participation was voluntary and where EcoTeam members had greater autonomy, and where the activities focused less on compliance and more on affecting real change, students expressed high levels of satisfaction and identified strongly with the program. Conflict with peers was not an issue in these schools.

This study was limited to schools in the Czech Republic with the highest performing EcoSchools programs and with a willingness to participate in the research. Additionally, it involved a fairly small number of focus groups. These factors limit the study's generalizability, and a similar study undertaken in another context might produce different results. Further, the results were derived from the thoughts, feelings, and perspectives of student participants; no direct observations of programming were made. Without an observer, comparisons between schools were more subjective. Subjectivity also played a role in the focus groups, since the researchers facilitated the discussions with their own agendas and objectives in mind. This subjectivity could have colored the results.

The authors recommend that schools choosing to implement EcoSchools programs make participation voluntary, since mandatory participation can lead to dissatisfaction with the program and conflict between EcoTeam students and their peers. They also recommend that schools use an emancipatory approach to EE, giving students a genuine voice in the program direction. This empowering approach leads to students feeling greater ownership over the program and to increased feelings of self-efficacy in terms of creating school-wide change. To make the emancipatory approach possible, the authors also recommend pre-implementation and ongoing training for teachers so that they are equipped to effectively facilitate the process.