Reciprocal Trust and Safety in Residential EE Settings

Research suggests that building trust may be instrumental in supporting broader intended outcomes of environmental education (EE), such as fostering personal growth, encouraging civic engagement, and contributing to pro-environmental behavior. Few EE studies to date, however, have characterized, operationalized, and measured trust particularly as it occurs in informal settings.

Therefore, this study set out to examine whether and how peer-to-peer trust develops among youth participants in a field-based residential EE program using a mixed-methods approach. The researchers selected classes from two schools with sixth-grade-level students (ages 11–12) who participated in NatureBridge, a residential, outdoor EE program at Golden Gate National Recreational Area, California. School 1 was a small, private school whose one sixth grade class of 28 students participated in the study, while School 2 was a larger public school whose three sixth grade classes of over 40 students total participated. Many of the students in School 1 had known each other since kindergarten, while some students in School 2 had not met prior to arriving at NatureBridge. During the NatureBridge programs, classroom teachers organized their students in hiking groups of 12–15 individuals, and, for the most part, students remained in those groups throughout the week. Students spent multiple 11 days with their primary instructors and hiking group— sharing meals, sleeping in the camp dorms, and engaging in cooperative group work in outdoor settings led by field educators.

This study examined the development of trust within these hiking groups. Specifically, the authors evaluated whether and how trust relationships among members of hiking groups changed during the NatureBridge program, and how group dynamics within hiking groups changed. The authors also explored how ideas about trust might differ in residential EE settings, such as the NatureBridge setting, versus formal classroom settings. The researchers drew upon validated quantitative measures of peer-to-peer trust in classroom settings and Social Network Analysis (SNA) requirements to design a structured survey related to trust among NatureBridge participants. The survey asked questions about each member of a student's hiking group: whether the student considers that person to be a friend; how often that person keeps promises; likeliness that the student would disclose something personal to them; likeliness that the student would go to them with a problem; and whether they trust the student. The researchers administered the survey to all participants the week prior to the program and immediately after. The researchers complemented the survey with open-ended items, field observations of students' interactions and daily discussion with field science educators during the program, as well as student focus groups with one school three weeks after the program ended. The researchers conducted statistical and network analyses of the survey data and thematically analyzed the qualitative data from focus groups and open-ended survey items. They used observations and informal daily discussion to contextualize findings.

The authors found that, during the NatureBridge program, trust increased among individuals within hiking groups. Survey results showed that, following the program, there were increases among different aspects of the trust relationship, including the friendship, promise, disclosure, problem, and reciprocal dimensions of trust. School 2 participants reported a greater increase than School 1, as many students in School 2 did not know each other prior to attending the program. Social network analysis results indicated that the interactions while at NatureBridge encouraged net positive increases of hiking group members that participants trusted. Further, the SNA data indicated that, apart from one School 1 hiking group, every other hiking group showed signs of becoming closer. Hiking group structures were less fragmented and more cohesive at the end of the program as peer-to-peer trust developed and/or strengthened among hiking group members over the multiple days.

Focus group findings indicated that, although dimensions of trust identified in classroom studies, such as friendship and reciprocal trust among students, applied to the NatureBridge setting, “keeping safe” as well as reciprocal trust with field science educators were particularly salient in the field-based residential context. Qualitative data suggested that the NatureBridge setting and structure, outside of school routines and norms, allowed participants to explore new roles and make new connections with their peers. Field science educators were instrumental in supporting this process as they facilitated novel experiences, allowed participants freedom to explore, and ensured their emotional and physical safety.

The authors identified limitations of the study. The small number of participants meant that some individuals (with low or high scores) may have skewed the network analysis results. Additionally, the structured survey measured individual relationships, whereas group-level metrics may be more appropriate to understand trust in group settings. Further, the study surveyed participants immediately before and immediately after the experience, whereas a longitudinal approach may be useful for assessing changes in trust over time. Finally, this study did not investigate the links between trust and intended program outcomes, such as personal growth and interpersonal skills. Yet, the authors believe that the findings suggest opportunities for developing and testing new tools and measures that explore distinctive dimensions of trust in field-based 12 residential settings rather than classroom settings. The findings also suggest that social network analysis is conceptually promising for studying trust in informal EE settings, such as this one.