Özgül Keleş, Rabia Eriş, Mustafa Aydoğdu


The purpose of the current study is to elicit the opinions constructed by 7th grade secondary school students about three components of the concept of sustainable development; environment, society and economy. Study group of the implementation consists of 20 students attending a public secondary school in 2014-2015 academic year. The study employed the phenomenological design, one of the qualitative research methods. Drawing method was used to collect the data of the study. Drawings representing the relationship between humans, nature and economy were prepared in line with the drawing method. Participants were asked to express thoughts evoked by these concepts through drawings and then to write under their drawings what they had wanted to express through their drawings. Then, small group works were conducted for students to illustrate the relationship between these concepts so that the relationship between these concepts could be elicited. In light of the findings of this analysis, it is seen that the cognitive connections established by the students on the components of the sustainable development concept are compatible with this concept.


Article visualizations:

Hit counter



education for sustainable development; phenomenology; sustainable development; secondary school


Acar, O. (2008). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için eğitim sistemi kapsamlı bir şekilde yeniden ele alınmalı [Presentation]. Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmanın Sektörel Politikalara Entegrasyonu Projesi Kapanış Toplantısı, Ankara.

Ashworth, P.; Lucas, U. (1998). What is ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 415-431.

Bögeholz, S., & Böhm, M.; Eggert, S.; Barkmann, J. (2014). Education for sustainable development in German science education: past – present – future. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(4), 231-248.

Boratav, K. (2002). Türkiye Iktisat Tarihi, 9th ed.; İmge Kitabevi: İstanbul.

Çalık, M. (2009). An integrated model for environmental education in Turkey. In N. Taylor, R. K. Coll, M. Littledyke & C. Eames (Eds.), Environmental education in context: An International perspective of the development and implementation of environmental education and its impact on student knowledge, attitudes and behaviour (pp. 109-122), Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Çepni, S. (2007). Araştırma ve Proje Çalışmalarına Giriş, Celepler Matbaacılık: Trabzon.

Chittleborough, G., & Treagust, D. (2008). Correct interpretation of chemical diagrams requires transforming from one level of representation to another. Research in science education, 38(4), 463-482.

Chittleborough, G., & Treagust, D. F. (2007). The modelling ability of non-major chemistry students and their understanding of the sub-microscopic level. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 8(3), 274-292.

Chula, M. (1998). Adolescents' drawings: A view of their worlds. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Diego, CA, April.

Contini, V., & Pascual, G. E. (2010). The earth chapter: An ethical framework for feasible utopia, discourse and communication for sustainable education. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 1(2), 25-33, 2010.

Creswell, J. W. (2015). Qualitative inquıry & research design, 2nd ed.; Siyasal Yayın Dağıtım: Ankara.

Demirbaş, Ö. G. (2011). Sustainable development in the curriculum of geography course. Journal of Human Sciences, 8(2), 596-615.

Donalek, J. G. (2004). Demystifying nursing research: phenomenology as a qualitative research method. Urologic nursing, 24, 516–517.

Eilks, I. (2015). Science education and education for sustainable development – justifications, models, practices and perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 149-158.

Engin, H. (2010). Teaching sustainable development, education of sustainability and environmental education in geography education. Masters’ Thesis, Marmara University, İstanbul.

Erten, S. (2014). 3. Sınıf Fen Bilimleri Ders Kitabı. Bilim ve Kültür Yayıncılık: Ankara.

Fien, J. (1993). Education for the environment: critical curriculum theorizing and environmental education. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.

Görmez, K. (2003). Çevre Sorunları ve Türkiye. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi Yayınları: Ankara, Turkey.

Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1-11.

Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2002). Mental, physical and mathematical models in the teaching and learning of physics, Sci. Educ. 86, 106.

Harris, J. M. (2000). Basic principles of sustainable development. Global Development and Environment Institute Working Papers 00-04. Medford, MA: Tufts University.

Hart, M. (1999). The Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators, 2nd ed; North Andover, MA: Hart Environmental Data.

Henderson, L., & Coombs, G. (2002). Mental models of teaching and learning with the www. winds of changing in the sea of learning, Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Auckland, New Zealand, 8-11 December.

Higgs, L. A., & McMillan, M. V. (2006). Teaching through modeling: Four schools’ experiences in sustainability education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(1), 39-53.

Hopkins, C., & McKeown, R. (2002). Education and sustainability responding to the global challenge. In D. Tilbury & R.B. Stevenson (Eds.), Education for Sustainable Development: An International Perspective (pp. 13-24). Switzerland: World Conservation Union.

IUCN, UNEP, WWF (1991) Caring for the earth - a strategy for sustainable living, IUCN, UNEP, WWF, Gland.

Jardins, D. J. (2006). Çevre Etiği Çevre Felsefesine Giriş (Environmental Ethics, Introduction to Environmental Philosophy, 1st ed; İmge Kitabevi: Ankara, Turkey.

Kearney, K. S., & Hyle, A. E. (2004). Drawing out emotions: The use of participant produced drawings in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Research, 4, 361-382.

Keleş, Ö. (2007). Application and evaluation of ecological footprint as an environmental education tool towards sustainable life. Ph.D Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.

Keleş, R., & Hamamcı, C. (2005). Çevre Politikası (Environmental Policy), 5th ed.; İmge Kitabevi: Ankara.

Kışlalıoğlu, M. F. (2005). Çevre ve Ekoloji (Environment and Ecology), 9th ed; Remzi Kitabevi: Istanbul, Turkey.

Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understanding of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(3), 28-49.

McDermott, J. (1981). Technology: The opiate of the intellectuals. In A. H. Teich (Ed.), Technology and Man’s Future. St. Martin’s Press: New York.

McNaughton, J. M. (2004). Educational drama in the teaching of education for sustainability. Environmental Education Research, 10(2), 139-155.

Norman, D. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models. (pp. 7-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Özdemir, O. (2007). A new environmental education perspective: “Education for sustainable development”. Education and Science, 32(145), 23-39.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, London, Sage Publications: New Delhi.

Petersen, J. F., & Alkış, S. (2009). How do Turkish eighth grade students conceptualize sustainability? European Journal of Education Studies, 1(1), 67-74.

Rosner, J. Wolfgang. (1995). Mental models for sustainability. J. Cleaner Prod., 3(1-2), 107-121.

Qablan, A. (2005). Education for sustainable development at the university level: Interactions of the need for community, fear of indoctrination, and the demands of work. Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University College of Education, USA.

Sarıtaş, M. (2009). Öğretim Teknolojileri ve Materyal Tasarımı, 2nd ed.; Pegem A Yayıncılık: Ankara.

Sayhan, H., Sayhan, S., & Demirbaş, Ö. Ç. (2013). Ecological footprints of primary school students and recommendations to diminish them. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture & Environmental Science, 13(4), 521-530.

Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable education – re-visioning learning and change, Schumacher Society Briefing no 6, Green Books, Dartington.

Sterling, S. (2003). Whole systems thinking as a basis for paradigm change in education: Explorations in the context of sustainability, PhD Thesis, University of Bath, UK.

Strickland, A. M., Kraft, A., & Bhattacharyya, G. (2010). What happens when representations fail to represent? Graduate students’ mental models of organic chemistry diagrams. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 11(4), 293301.

Summers, M.; Kruger, C.; Childs, A., & Mant, J. (2000). Primary school teachers understanding of environmental issues: an interview study. Environmental Education Research, 6(4), 293-312.

Tanrıverdi, B. (2009). Analyzing primary school curriculum in terms of sustainable environmental education. Education and Science, 34(151), 89-103.

Tolan, B. (1978). Toplum Bilimlerine Giriş. Kalite Matbaası: Ankara.

Torunoglu, E. (2003). Tübitak vizyon 2023: panel için notlar: Sürdürülebilir kalkınma paradigması üzerine ön notlar. Ankara: Tübitak.

TTKB. (2013). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı (3-8. Sınıflar). Retrieved from http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/program.aspx, May.

Türer, B. (2010). The Awareness Levels of Science and Social Science Prospective Teachers Regarding Sustainable Environment. Masters’ Thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey.

UNCED. (1992). 'Promoting Education, Public Awareness and Training', Agenda 21, Chapter 36, UNCED.

UNESCO. (2002). Education for sustainability. from Rio to Johannesburg: Lessons Learnt from a Decade of Commitment. UNESCO, Paris.

UNESCO. (2005). Guidelines and recommendations for reorienting teacher education to address sustainability. Education for Sustainable Development in Technical Paper. UNESCO, Paris.

Uras, A., & Acar, A. (2008). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma. Sunum: Türkiye iklim değişimine uyum kapasitesinin artırılması BM ortak programı (Sustainable development. Presentation: Increasing adaptation capacity of Turkey to climate change UN fellow program).

Walshe, N. (2008). Understanding students’ conceptions of sustainability. Environmental Education Research, 14(5), 537-558.

WCED. (1987). Our common future, world commission on environment and development, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Webster, K. (2007). Hidden sources: Understanding natural systems is the key to an evolving and aspirational ESD. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1(1), 37-43.

Whistler, K. (2007). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitim programı. Kültür ve turizm bakanlığı strateji geliştirme başkanlığı toplantı katılımı bilgi notu (Sustainable development training program. Culture and tourism ministry strategy development meeting attendance note), August. Ankara.

Yapıcı, M. (2003). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için eğitim (Education for sustainable development). Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1, 225-230.

Yardımcı, E., & Bağcı K., G. (2010). Children’s views of environment and environmental problems. Elementary Education Online, 9(3), 1122-1136.

Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2000). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (Qualitative research methods in the social sciences), 9th ed.; Seçkin Yayıncılık: Ankara.

Yıldız, K., & Sipahioğlu, Ş.; Yılmaz, M. (2000). Çevre Bilimi (Environmental Science). Gündüz Eğitim & Yayıncılık: Ankara.

Zians, A. W. (1997). A qualitative analysis of how experts use and interpret the kinetic school drawing technique, Master’s Thesis, University of Toronto, Canada.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Özgül Keleş, Rabia Eriş, Mustafa Aydoğdu

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2018. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).