We Are All Downstream: Teaching Middle Years Science From A Sustainability Perspective Amanda Freedman Tétrault, M.Ed. Candidate, Faculty of Education, University of Manitoba Introduction If 82% of the Canadian public rate sustainability a top or high priority national goal (Hogan & Associate Inc, 2006), and only 32 percent say that most of the people they know personally do not care about environmental issues, why are we as a nation not moving forward? In that 2006 study by James Hogan and Associates Inc. it was determined that one of the barriers Canadians stated for their own individual reason for “not acting more sustainably”, 43% felt that a major barrier was that they needed to know more about solutions, and 31% felt that they were unable to solve the problems alone. It is my belief that we need to capitalize on the feelings that sustainability is important and focus on overcoming the barriers to action and knowledge. It was the hope of this researcher to not only provide information to students about issues surrounding sustainability that fit within the existing curriculum, but to give them the power to realize that one can make a difference. The research question looked at is: can the use of a resource designed to incorporate sustainability issues into current curricula improve students’ affinity for science and sustainability, improve knowledge about the specific subject matter and motivate students to change behaviours related to sustainability over the “regular” way of teaching? Previous Studies In an earlier aspect of this study a survey (Tetrault, unpublished) was submitted by 51 middle years science teachers. The goal was to determine if the perceived risk factors for Manitoba teachers teaching science with a sustainability focus connected with the literature. Two general themes emerged that did tie closely with the literature. Teachers indicated that it was hard to find the time to either adapt pre-existing resources to match with the Manitoba curriculum or to match specific classroom requirements. The other theme that was presented was the absence of resources: a general absence; an absence related to a specific course; or an absence of resources related to sustainability. This has been backed up by several other studies (Stapp et al 1996a; Gayford, 2002; Bowers, 2003; Tilbury & Cooke, 2005). Acknowledgments: Special appreciation to: Dr. Gordon Robinson (Advisor),Dr. Rob Renaud. Beginning with knowledge Then actions related to sustainability, but more than just money… Methods Five experimental classes were assigned a researcher-developed resource for teachers to use that was anticipated to change students’ feelings and actions in relation to science and sustainability. There were also five control classrooms that matched the experimental grouped by school. This was to alleviate some potential concerns over student socio-economic status, school climate, administrative supports, etc. The students were given multiple choice pre and post tests that were exactly the same with the exception of a space for additional qualitative comments at the end of the post test. The tests contained four sections in which the researcher was testing for: Affinity for Science; Affinity related to Sustainability; Knowledge of Water Systems and Actions related to Sustainability. The Cronbach’s Alpha-based reliability for each section ranged from in the post tests with the exception of the section dealing with Knowledge of Water Systems. This section had a low figure of.493 for the post test. Preliminary Analysis The early data indicates that overall the resource was a success in the five classrooms that it was piloted in as compared to the control classroom. There was a significant improvement (see Table I below) of the students in the experimental group in three out of the four areas targeted. The only area that was not considered significant was the knowledge of water systems. There was a greater increase in the mean number for the experimental group over the control, but not enough to be considered significant, possibly due to the fact that it was on a scale of 1 or 0 with 1 being a correct answer and 0 being an incorrect answer. Next Steps Further analysis will be required as the data was recently collected and has not been thoroughly reviewed. Once reviewed and if found successful, the resource will be adapted once more following the piloting teachers’ comments then will be available for distribution for any grade 8 teacher who is interested in this unit. Table I Deviation (SD) for Pre and Post Tests in Control and Experimental Groupings Summary of Means and Standard Deviations for each Section Studied (N=111) Affinity for science Affinity related to sustainability Knowledge of water systems Actions related to sustainability Pre testPost test*Pre testPost test*Pre testPost testPre testPost test** Control SD Experimental SD Note. Significance only considered on post test at this time. * p>.05 **p>.01