Document Actions

Section V. Not-Aware Respondents

by CAEE — last modified 12-26-2007 17:14

Section V.  Not Aware Respondents

 

At the beginning of the survey, respondents were segregated by their awareness (or not) of CAEE.  Those who were not aware of CAEE were routed to a set of two questions about the importance of environmental education and perceived support for the CAEE mission.  These data are summarized in Tables NA1 and NA2 below. 

 

Table NA1.  Importance of and Commitment to Environmental Education

Importance of / Commitment to EE for

Importance

(mean score)

Commitment

 (mean score)

Current Professional Position

3.3

3.5

Friends and Family

3.2

3.4

Children in Public Schools

3.9

3.3

Community leaders

3.8

3.3

Government policies

3.8

3.3

You personally

3.9

3.7

·          Importance was measured on a 4-point scale where:  1= not important at all; 2 = not very important, 3 = somewhat important, and 4 = very important.

·          Commitment was measured on a 4-point scale where: 1= not committed at all; 2 = not very committed, 3 = somewhat committed, 4 = very committed

 

Discussion Points:

·         Respondents indicated that environmental education is at least somewhat important for all groups provided; but most important for school children, themselves personally, community leaders, and in government policies (mean = 3.8 and 3.9).  

·         Respondents indicated they were at least somewhat committed in all categories (means range from 3.3 to 3.7).  Personal commitment was the highest at a mean of 3.7.    

 

Two follow-up questions were asked of these respondents.  Content analyzed responses to these two questions are summarized below. 

 

Are there “other” situations where you feel that environmental education is important for you?  Explain. (n=39)


·    In school; for youth; in teaching (n=7)*

·    Where I recreate, where there is nature, for ecosystems, in public parks (n=7)

·    In business, for big business (n=6)*

·    For the community (n=6)*

·    Everywhere; globally; all the time (n=5)

·    For my friends and family (n=4)*

·    How I spend money (n=2)

·    How I vote (n=1)

·    For the government (n=1)*


 

*These respondents apparently felt it necessary to indicate their views on the scale item as well as in the open-ended responses.

 

 

Are there other situations where you are committed to environmental education?  Explain. (n=20)


·       For youth and community; in school; as art teacher (n=3)

·       In parks and playgrounds (n=2)

·       Awareness of issues (n=2)

·       All the time; everyone’s personal responsibility; 24/7 (n=2)

·       In church (n=1)

·       As a role model (n=1)

·       In industry (n=1)


 

 

These respondents were then asked about their support of the CAEE mission to “serve all sectors of Colorado by improving the collective effectiveness of environmental education”.  Responses to this forced-choice question (measured on a 4-point scale) are summarized in Table NA2 below.

 

Table NA2.  CAEE Mission Support by Those Unaware of CAEE

Mission Variable

Mean score

Personal support of the CAEE mission

 

3.7

Perceived support by your current supervisor of CAEE mission

3.0

Perceived current support of state government of CAEE mission

2.3

Desired support of state government of CAEE mission

3.7

Support was measured on a 4-point scale where:  1= not at all supportive, 2 = not very supportive, 3 = somewhat supportive, 4 = very supportive.

 

Discussion Comments:

·        Respondent support of the CAEE mission and desired support by state government was very high (mean = 3.7) although perceived current support by state government was perceived as very low (mean = 2.3), and perceived support of current work supervisor was also low (mean = 3.0).

 

 

“Not Aware” respondents were also asked questions about environmental management.  For these questions, an Environmental Management System (EMS) was defined as “a written set of environmental policies and procedures which identify your environmental goals and objectives.”  The findings from these questions are summarized below.

 

 

Table NA3.  Does Your Organization Have an EMS?

Yes = 32% (n=30)

No = 68% (n=65)

Questions for YES Respondents

Responses*

Question for NO Respondents

Responses *

Do you know what environmental requirements apply to your business?

18

Are you interested in developing an environmental management system for your business or organization?

19

Has your company/organization ever done an environmental audit?

21

 

Do you have any environmental permits or reporting requirements in your work today?

12

Are you expecting to make any change in your business in the next 2 years that might involve environmental impacts?

12

* Responses do not sum to total n as respondents could indicate more than one response.

 

Respondents, who answered yes to the initial EMS questions above, were also asked two open-ended questions.  Below is a bulleted summary of the content analyzed responses.

 

How has your EMS system changed the way you communicate with the public on environmental issues? (n=22)

·       Helpful in prioritizing target markets and messages; helps focus programming; customer oriented (n=4)

·       Helpful in ensuring message consistency (n=1)

·       Still new; still learning (n=1)

·       It limits the discussion (n=1)

·       Yes (n=3)

·       Other (n=12) (Note:  Most respondents either did not understand the question or used this as a place to describe their program; responses are not particularly relevant.)

 

What employee education is required by your EMS? (n=24)

·       In-house training, classes, meetings (n=7)

·       None, nothing required (n=7)

·       4-year degree, formal degree (n=4)

·       Conferences, local specialists (n=3)