The Communication of Values, Beliefs, and Norms in Live Animal Interpretive Experiences: a Comparative Case Study
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE COMMUNICATION OF VALUES, BELIEFS, AND NORMS IN LIVE ANIMAL INTERPRETIVE EXPERIENCES: A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY Susan Charlotte Caplow A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Curriculum for the Environment and Ecology. Chapel Hill 2014 Approved by: Pamela Jagger Lisa Campbell Charlotte Clark Elizabeth Dickinson Paul Leslie Peter White © 2014 Susan Charlotte Caplow ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Susan Caplow: The communication of values, beliefs, and norms in live animal interpretive experiences: a comparative case study (Under the direction of Pamela Jagger) Environmental education (EE) is one of the most important tools available to help promote pro-environmental behavior. However, encouraging pro-environmental behavior requires more than knowledge dissemination alone; EE programs frequently contain messages intended to cultivate environmental values, beliefs, and behavioral norms because these can facilitate the uptake of pro-environmental behavior. In particular, Live Animal Interpretive Experiences (LAIEs) can help encourage these types of shifts because emotional connections with animals can expand one’s sense of moral obligation to include caring for animals and the environment. My dissertation investigates three questions about LAIEs: 1) How does the institutional context frame messages on values, beliefs, and norms, and how do educators articulate them during LAIEs? 2) What values, beliefs, and norms do participants bring to the LAIE? 3) How do learners interpret LAIEs, and what are their post-program behavioral intentions? I compare LAIEs at three facilities with different institutional values, which is a novel contribution to the field that elucidates the relationship between institutional mission and the education program design, delivery, and interpretation. My cases include a research institution, an animal rescue, and an educational facility. iii I find that different types of organizations define and promote environmental values in critically different ways. Each organization follows a specialized VBN pathway that constructs meaning for the animal either as an individual, a representative of a species, or as an ambassador for an ecosystem. The scale at which the animal’s value is constructed affects what kinds of threats and opportunities for individual action follow. Learners at all three sites share a generally pro-environmental profile, but learners differ across sites on some incoming values, beliefs, and norms. These differences suggest that learners may be choosing to attend different animal- themed experiences based on their personal values. Learners perceive key values-oriented messages from the institution fairly accurately, but their behavioral intentions post-program differ across sites. These differences are likely attributable to the relationship the individual has with the organization and the type of behavioral suggestions presented in the LAIEs. These findings can help educational facilities better design programs to meet institutional goals and to encourage learners to engage in pro-environmental behavior. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was supported by a variety of institutions and individuals who deserve many thanks. Funding for this research was provided by the A.C. and Dot Hall Summer Research Fellowship (UNC), and support during the academic year was provided by the Carolina Population Center and the Curriculum for the Environment and Ecology at UNC. I would also like to thank my collaborators at my three field sites, both key informants and educators. I’d like to thank in particular Geoff Horsfield at Carolina Tiger Rescue, Niki Barnett at the Duke Lemur Center, and Wayne Justice at the North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores. I would also like to thank all of my survey participants and learner interviewees for all of the interesting information they so kindly shared with me. My dissertation committee has also provided invaluable guidance and assistance throughout this entire process. Pam Jagger supported me through a substantive topic transition, and Paul Leslie has provided sage advice starting from day one at UNC. Charlotte Clark and Elizabeth Dickinson’s expertise in environmental education proved invaluable to this project, and Lisa Campbell and Peter White provided helpful feedback and support from other disciplines as well. I have also had help from several colleagues outside of my committee. Jaye Cable has also been an amazing mentor and friend throughout all of the stages of my dissertation project, and Elizabeth Shay helped me work through big deadlines and gave me teaching advice and v support along the way. I also received statistical guidance from Ashton Verdery, Kathryn Stevenson, and the Odum Institute at UNC. Finally, I offer my deepest thanks to my friends and family, in particular my mother, who has no idea what I’m up to but is very excited for me to finally finish school. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ xi LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... xiii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Overview & justification .................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Research questions ........................................................................................................... 4 1.3. Background ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.1. Conservation psychology .......................................................................................... 5 1.3.2. Environmental education .......................................................................................... 6 1.3.3. Nature interpretation ................................................................................................. 7 1.3.4. Free-choice learning.................................................................................................. 8 1.3.5. Research gaps.......................................................................................................... 11 1.4. Theory ............................................................................................................................ 12 1.4.1. Value-belief-norm theory ........................................................................................ 12 1.4.2. Limitations to the VBN framework ........................................................................ 17 1.4.3. Learning theories .................................................................................................... 18 1.4.4. Summary of background and theory ....................................................................... 20 1.5. Significance of this work ................................................................................................ 21 1.6. Dissertation structure ...................................................................................................... 22 CHAPTER 2: STUDY DESIGN & METHODS .......................................................................... 23 2.1. Design overview ............................................................................................................. 23 2.2. Site selection ................................................................................................................... 24 2.2.2. Field sites ................................................................................................................ 27 2.3. Methods .......................................................................................................................... 28 2.3.1. Methods & data for RQ1......................................................................................... 29 vii 2.3.2. Methods & data for RQ2......................................................................................... 34 2.3.3. Methods & data for RQ3......................................................................................... 40 2.4. Data analysis ................................................................................................................... 41 2.5. Reliability and validity ................................................................................................... 43 CHAPTER 3: THE INSTITUTION ............................................................................................. 47 3.1. Chapter overview ........................................................................................................... 47 3.2. Institutional Context ....................................................................................................... 48 3.2.1. Carolina Tiger Rescue............................................................................................. 48 3.2.2. Duke Lemur Center ................................................................................................. 54 3.2.3. North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores ..................................................... 59