Evaluating Changes in Ecological Consciousness of University Students with the NEP Scale: The Effects of Studying Geography Using Landscape Photography

Evaluating changes in ecological consciousness of university students with the NEP scale: the effects of studying Geography using landscape photography Fraile-Jurado, P.1, Sánchez-Rodríguez, E. 1 & Rodriguez-Galiano, V. 1 1Departamento de Geografía Física y A.G.R., Universidad de Sevilla, Spain. Facultad de Geografía e Historia, C/ María de Padilla s/n 41004, Sevilla. [email protected] This study examined how studying Geography and using personal landscape photography impact university-level Physical Geography students' ecological perspectives. A survey, employing the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP), was conducted on 77 History undergraduates at the semester's start and end. The results showed a significant shift towards more ecologically-minded views in all students, particularly those incorporating their own photos. NEP, using a five-point Likert scale, enabled efficient analysis. The study of Physical Geography positively influenced students' environmental attitudes, with landscape photography enhancing this effect. Therefore, adding personal landscape photos to a public repository can effectively raise environmental consciousness among university students. Keywords: environmentalism; student attitudes; environmental education; landscape photography; statistical analysis 1. Introduction Ecological consciousness is a mental formation that is shaped by various factors, including ecological knowledge, attitudes, focus towards nature, and intentions. It is a critical component of human behavior and is formed through the process of ecological education and personal experiences. According to Cherdymova et al. (2018), ecological consciousness is characterized by the level of an individual's ecological knowledge, attitudes towards nature, and environmentally oriented behavior. This means that an individual's level of ecological consciousness is directly linked to their understanding of the natural world and their attitudes towards preserving it. Korchegin et al. (1987) define ecological consciousness as the connections between nature and society, which are realized through social relations associated with activities aimed at optimizing the connection between the two systems. This definition emphasizes the interdependence between human society and the natural world and the importance of preserving the balance between both. According to Moiseev (1998) and Belozerova (2001), ecological consciousness can be defined as a set of ideas about the relationship between humans and nature, including corresponding strategies, technologies of interaction, and ecological activity that serves as a motivator, regulator, and controller of ecological behavior. These definitions emphasize the role of ecological consciousness in shaping human behavior towards nature, as individuals with a higher level of ecological consciousness are more likely to adopt and engage in environmentally conscious behavior and activities. The multiple definitions of ecological consciousness highlight the various components and factors that influence its development, including ecological knowledge, attitudes, focus towards nature, and intentions. The importance of ecological consciousness in shaping human behavior towards a more sustainable future cannot be overstated, and it is crucial to continue promoting and enhancing ecological education to foster its growth. In this study ecological consciousness is defined as the awareness and understanding of the interrelations between human societies and the natural environment, encompassing an individual's ecological knowledge, attitudes towards nature, environmentally oriented behaviors, and intentions to preserve natural resources. The general population's ecological consciousness has changed dramatically since the 1960s, driven by environmental disasters and increased awareness of human impact on the environment, as well as the spread of international news. Cherdymova et al. (2018) found that increased environmental consciousness leads to increased ecological consciousness, encouraging environmentally conscious behavior. The shift towards ecological consciousness is positive and represents a move towards a more sustainable future where human behavior is guided by a deeper understanding of environmental protection. In Western countries, consciousness about environmental problems has been widely enhanced for several decades. It may be observed that in young people sustained exposure to messages promoting environmental protection and education in eco-friendly practices (e.g. recycling, reducing pollution, responsible consumption) during their school years may have resulted in a stable level of environmental consciousness or a lower degree of importance being attributed to it compared to previous generations, regardless of the level of knowledge about ecology or natural sciences. The question of whether the study of geography, which provides an understanding of the physical and human environment, its elements and the factors influencing its functioning and balance, could significantly affect the ecological consciousness of young people is worth exploring. Additionally, it is worth examining the potential impact of certain pedagogical resources, such as landscape photographs, commonly utilized in geography, on this outcome. The objective of this paper is to examine the influence of geography education on students' ecological opinions and commitment. This study will also analyze the effect of incorporating landscape photographs to Geophotopedia as a teaching tool and explore its usefulness in enhancing students' understanding of environmental issues. The findings of this research will provide valuable insights into the role of geography education in shaping students' environmental perspectives. 2. Background The Role of Education in Eco Consciousness: the contribution of Geography In the current era of environmental crisis and climate change, the need to foster environmental awareness among future generations is evident (Schleicher 1989). In this context, education plays a crucial role in shaping individuals' ecological consciousness, equipping them with the knowledge, skills, and values necessary to understand and address global environmental challenges. Although the development of environmental consciousness is not solely dependent on environmental education and is also influenced by factors such as environmental policy and social and personal aspects (psychological, ethical, etc.) (Schleicher 1989), there is considerable consensus that the starting point should be a solid environmental education (Schleicher 1989; McKeown- Ice 1994; Shumilina and Anсiferova 2023). Environmental education is a crucial tool for enhancing students' environmental consciousness at all educational levels (Shumilina and Anсiferova 2023); it aims explicitly to deepen understanding of the environment while nurturing attitudes and behaviors that promote environmental conservation, management, and sustainability (Chang and Kidman 2024). In addition to constituting a distinct curriculum area in some educational systems (Brazil, Canada, Australia among others), environmental education can be approached from various disciplines such as Natural Sciences and Biology (teaching students about the interconnection of living organisms and how human activities affect ecosystems), Social Sciences (addressing topics such as environmental justice and individual and collective responsibility toward the environment), Technology (studying green technologies, renewable energies, sustainable design, and strategies to minimize the environmental impact of human activities), or Economics (examining how economic and political decisions affect the environment and people's quality of life, and exploring concepts such as sustainable development, circular economy, and valuation of ecosystem services). Geography, on the other hand, "is an ideal disciplinary vehicle for environmental education" (McKeown-Ice 1994), as it includes both the scientific study of the environment and the study of human-environment interactions in both directions (the impact of human behavior on the environment and the influence of the environment on human behavior), with a spatial perspective at various scales and from a multicultural vision (McKeown-Ice 1994). It thus provides conceptual and analytical tools that are essential for environmental education by helping students understand the complexity of natural and human systems and addressing environmental challenges in an informed and effective manner (Kahraman 2016). Factors influencing ecological consciousness The level of ecological consciousness among university students varies based on various factors such as school type, gender, education level of parents, parents' political views, profession, and household income. Taskin (2009) found that students from public high schools, female students, lower middle class students, students with welleducated parents in white-collar professions, and students with liberal parents tend to have more pro-environmental attitudes compared to others. On the other hand, Harraway et al (2012) noted that at this stage of higher education, students tend to hold weak pro-ecological views but that particularly zoology students tend to hold stronger pro-ecological views. However, it is important to note that the surveyed students were mostly male and the other student groups were predominantly female. As gender roles become less defined, with both men and women sharing tasks and women increasing their roles in family decision-making, the traditional views on gender-specific environmental concerns are being questioned. Nevertheless, Momsen (2000, 2007) suggests minimal and inconsistent gender differences in environmental consciousness, challenging the notion that inherent gender traits determine ecological consciousness. Photography and Geography learning Cherdymova et al (2018) suggest that the understanding of the world is increasingly shaped by images. They argue that images design and form our understanding of the world, with visual susceptibility replacing or supplementing textual susceptibility. In today's social communication, messages are dominated by techniques that capture and reproduce audiovisual aspects and dimensions of the world and human behavior. The acquisition of visual data through photography or interpretation of photographic materials provides insight into visually observable aspects of social life. Photography has been a key tool in geography since its invention (Sidaway, 2002). Aerial photography, in particular, is widely used to study landforms and their changes over time. Similarly, non-aerial photography, also known as landscape photography, is often used to illustrate a variety of geographical phenomena in textbooks and scientific papers (Yasar & Seremet, 2007; Rose, 2008; Sidaway, 2002). Although aerial photography and landscape photography are complementary tools serving different purposes within geography, the later offers significant advantages in terms of environment perception. This form of photography is particularly valuable as it provides a more intuitive and accessible perspective of the environment, reflecting the natural human viewpoint, facilitating a better appreciation and understanding of geographical phenomena as they are experienced in daily life, thereby enhancing emotional and cognitive connection with the studied space. Additionally, landscape photography has been used to measure landscape changes through a technique known as repeated photography. Although the application of this latter method is more limited in bibliography given its technical demands (Malde, 1973; Khan et al, 2013; Berger, 2017). Historically, the use of descriptive images of landscapes predates the widespread use of photography (Fedotova et al., 2014), as evidenced by early 20th century textbooks (Jennings, 2006). Despite this, the availability of high quality geographical photographs of specific territories has been challenging, being its presence determining the value of textbooks (Morgan, 2003; Sidaway & Hall, 2018). Today, the proliferation of online landscape images has made filtering and selecting the most appropriate photographs for academic purposes a significant task. With the advent of 3D modelling technology, it is now possible to obtain virtual images of any location on Earth, including those that are difficult to access with traditional cameras. The use of landscape photography in geography education is virtually essential. Historically, landscape photographs have been shown in classrooms to illustrate the phenomena being studied (Halverson, 1929). Recent research has reported that incorporating didactic techniques that involve intensive use of photography by geography students leads to more effective learning. Fraile-Jurado et al. (2019) found that incorporating landscape photographs into Geography teaching, through a participatory approach that combines lectures with interactive photo analysis, significantly enhances students' understanding and retention of theoretical concepts compared to traditional lecture-based methods. This aligns with the empirical evidence that the level of student engagement with a subject is positively correlated with academic performance. Ryan and Aasetre (2020) showed that integrating digital stories in higher education geography enhances deep learning and ethical engagement; and Delfino (2019) reported high levels of student engagement and a positive correlation with academic performance, influenced by teacher, school, and family factors, all underscoring the importance of implementing participatory and technological teaching strategies to optimize learning and academic performance in geography. This relationship underscores why field trips, which have a well-established reputation as an effective teaching tool (Tal, 2012; Nairn, 1996; Kerawalla et al., 2012; Wheeler, 1985), are commonly used in geography studies. Tal (2004) emphasizes the balance between structured and student-centered activities during field trips, while Nairn (1996) highlights their cultural significance in geography. Kerawalla et al. (2012) demonstrate that field trips facilitate complex sense-making processes through hands-on data collection and problem-solving, and Wheeler (1985) shows how they enhance the understanding of geographical concepts through empirical observation. Additionally, Ting and Cheng (2017) found that participatory and experiential learning approaches, such as field trips, significantly influence students' pro-environmental behaviors and engagement with the environment, demonstrating that the relationship between the student and the environment greatly enhances environmental understanding and academic performance. The benefits of utilizing real photographs in geography education are evident to many educators, stemming from their ability to offer a closer and more comprehensive understanding of territorial elements compared to mere texts or diagrammatic representations. Although studies specifically addressing this issue are not widespread, the advantages have been substantiated (Fraile-Jurado et al., 2019). The use of imagery facilitates an enriched engagement with the subject matter, enabling students to visualize and comprehend geographical concepts in a more tangible manner (Henderson & Rickard 1972, Jones, 2000; Richar & Lahman, 2015). On the contrary, it is pertinent to acknowledge certain drawbacks associated with this method. Collaboratively discussing photographs requires a significant portion of class time. Additionally, student inquiries can lead to extended discussions, thereby allocating more time to photographic content over traditional conceptual material (maps, handbooks, etc.). However, it should be noted that such occurrences are indicative of a high level of student motivation (Gómez, 2014). Geophotopedia: A Geo-referenced Landscape Photograph Repository Specialized repositories of geo-referenced landscape photographs that identify geographical elements in each image are scarce in geography education. To mitigate this issue, Geophotopedia was established in 2012 in the University of Seville (Fraile- Jurado et al., 2016) as a platform for users with knowledge of Geography to upload freely accessible, labelled geo-referenced landscape photographs (Figure 1). Geophotopedia, created by the University of Seville, is a repository of georeferenced and tagged images that provides an extensive collection of resources for geography studies. As of 2024, it contains over 20,000 images licensed under Creative Commons, hosted on a Flickr server that supports spatial and thematic searches. Students upload their own field images, which are then filtered and supervised by university faculty to ensure accuracy and relevance. The repository uses advanced technology to maintain and share these images, including geotagging and metadata management tools. Access to Geophotopedia is available to both students and the public, facilitating a collaborative The response scale of questions 2, 5, 7, 10, 11, and 12 (which were formulated from an anti-environmentalist perspective) was reversed so that the highest value always indicated the most environmentalist position. The difference between the June and February answers for each question and student was then calculated, so that positive values indicate a change towards more environmentalist positions and negative values towards less environmentalist positions. For questions 14 and 15, which are qualitative, only changes between the two dates could be established. Since the aforementioned four students provided different answers to the repeated questions (2 and 12), the Alpha Cronbach index was used separately for the February and June data to examine the consistency of responses. This index evaluates inter-item correlation within a questionnaire, yielding a value between 0 and 1. Proximity to 1 indicates heightened internal consistency, signifying increased assurance that responses are non-random. The total average scores of the February and June surveys was computed, applying a pairedsamples T test to determine if the differences found between them were statistically significant or merely a result of random variability. The samples are considered paired as they correspond to the same individuals before and after the treatment (in this case, Physical Geography classes). The mean value of the responses was calculated for each date for each NEP dimension and a one-factor ANOVA was employed to ascertain whether there were significant differences among some of them. To identify which pairs of dimensions within the NEP differed significantly, the Scheffé test was applied. Among the post hoc tests, the Scheffé test is notably conservative, exhibiting a reduced propensity to identify significant differences in the absence thereof. The basic descriptive statistics was computed for every question and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests were applied to evaluate normality. The Wilcoxon and sign nonparametric tests were applied, as the questionnaire were answered by the same individuals at two different moments (Triola, 2004; Conover, 1999; Siegel & Castellan, 1972). The sign test aims to test the null hypothesis (H0) being the pre- and posttreatment response belong to the same population, which means that there are no significant differences. The sign of the difference between the pre- and post-response was examined, so that if H0 is true, it is expected that approximately half of the differences are positive and half are negative, regardless of the magnitude of the difference. This issue (not considering the magnitude of the difference) was addressed in the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, which in addition to the sign, uses the magnitude of the difference to test the null hypothesis that the two samples come from populations with the same distribution. These two same hypothesis contrast tests were later applied separately to the group of students who contributed by uploading photos to Geophotopedia (n=31) and to the one who did not (n=46), to verify if actively engaging in work with landscape photographs differently affects the evolution of students' ecological consciousness. But first, it was checked whether both groups already presented differences in the initial survey by applying the Mann-Whitney test (Hollander & Wolfe, 2013; Jickling & Wals, 2008). This nonparametric test, which compares the medians of two independent samples, was deemed appropriate due to the non-normally distributed nature of the data. All participants in the research voluntarily declared their participation, and the study protocol has been approved in its ethical aspects by the Department of Physical Geography and A.G.R. of the University of Seville, responsible for the teaching of the subject. 4. Results General ecological consciousness of students The Alpha-Cronbach index indicated sufficient internal consistency in the responses to the survey, suggesting that the students did not answer randomly in either February or June, although the index was slightly lower in June than in February (6.8 versus 6.9). The majority of students held considerably environmentalist opinions according to the NEP-based surveys. The mean of the responses for the whole group (n=77) in February was 3.71, while in June it was 3.82, with similar standard deviations but slightly higher in June (Coefficient of Variation of 29.62% for February and 30.81% for June). All questions received ratings higher than 3 except for one (Figure 3). The question with the lowest ecological consciousness was number 4, which referred to the Limits of growth and particularly the number of resources available to humanity on the planet. Only one question (number 6) received a rating above 4.5, which was related to the Possibility of an eco-crisis and particularly that human beings are seriously abusing the planet. Figure 3. Stacked frequencies (left axis) and Mean response (right axis) per question. F: February, J: June. Colors refer to scoring answered by students. Values from 1 to 5 are shown from bottom to top and red to dark green. When grouping the questions into the five main dimensions of environmentalism (Table 2), the mean value was consistently above 3, both in February and June. The dimension with the highest mean was the Possibility of ecocrisis (4.18 in February, 4.47 in June), while the one with the lowest mean was related to Growth limits (3.26 and 3.11 points, respectively). Except for the Possibility of ecocrisis, the dispersion of the responses was slightly higher in June than in February. The analysis of variance confirmed that the average responses of the students in the five dimensions are not statistically equal in both February and June. The results of the Scheffé post-hoc test for each pair are shown in Table 3. Dimension N February June Mean Std Mean Std Antianthropocentrism 154 3.53 1.09 3.67 1.11 Fragility of the natural balance 154 3.90 0.90 4.05 0.97 Growth limits 231 3.26 1.30 3.11 1.38 Possibility of ecocrisis 231 4.18 0.87 4.47 0.76 Rejection of exceptionalism 154 3.66 0.95 3.84 1.00 Table 2. Results obtained for the entire group of students in February and June by dimensions of each question. Sig Antianthropoc entrism Fragility of the natural balance Growth limits Possibility of ecocrisis Rejection of except. Antianthropocentrism - 0.04 0.04 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.75 Fragility of the natural balance - 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.01 0.40 0.54 Growth limits - 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Possibility of ecocrisis - 0.00 0.00 Rejection of exceptionalism - Table 3. Sig. levels resulting from the analysis of variance using Scheffé post-hoc test for February (left) and June (right). The results of the survey about which pillar of sustainability is more important (Figure 4) showed that most students considered environmental aspects as the most significant pillar of sustainability. Cultural, economic, and political pillars followed in importance. The consistency of these results remained relatively unchanged between the two survey administration periods in February and June, with a minimal increase observed in the response related to the environmental pillar, to the detriment of the cultural pillar. The second extra question in the survey evaluated the level of participation in environmental activities and revealed a generally low level of engagement, with the exception of learning activities, which may be attributed to the presence of ecological education within the curriculum (Figure 5). Figure 4. Results of the question about the principal pillar of sustainability in February (red) and June (green). Figure 5. Results of the question about participation in environmental activities in February (red) and June (green). Effects of physical geography classes on the ecological consciousness of students The paired-samples T test conducted on the mean score observed in February and June rejected the null hypothesis, being therefore the differences between them random. The observed difference between the mean response in February and June, although small (3.71 and 3.82, respectively), was statistically significant. The results of the analysis for each NEP question are presented in Table 4, which displays the averages for the February and June surveys, as well as the differences observed between the two and the results of the application of the Wilkoxon and the sign tests. Overall, positive shifts in student opinions from February to June was shown, which aligns with previous research that has identified changes in student thinking when engaging with course material (Kostova et al. 2011, Maura, 2002). It was observed that in 9 out of the 12 test questions there was a positive increase in the average responses given by the students (positive differences) for the group of 77 students (Table 4). However, only three of these changes were statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (questions 3, 6 and 10) The two with the greatest difference belong to the same dimension, the Possibility of ecocrisis. On the other hand, there were three questions with a negative trend (i.e. towards less ecological concern) and in one of them the change was statistically significant (question 4, related to the Growth limits dimension). Effects of the specific work with photographs on the ecological consciousness of students The Mann-Whitney test (Mann and Whitney, 1947) applied to the initial survey conducted in February did not reveal statistically significant differences in any of the NEP questions for the group of students that uploaded photos to Geophotopedia and the rest. This could suggest that further differences would be associated to the use of Geophotopedia. The same test, applied to the responses given in June, showed statistically significant differences between the mean responses in five of the questions (2, 8, 10, 11 and 12) for both groups, those who uploaded photos and those who did not. Table 4. NEP survey results by question for the entire group in February and June, observed differences and statistical significance of the differences. Table 5 presents the mean responses to each question in February and June, the difference, and the results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the sign test separately for the group that collaborated in Geophotopedia and the group that did not. Question Average Difference (Jun-Feb) Wilkoxon Sig Sign test Sig Feb Jun 1. We are approaching the limit of the number of people the Earth can support. 3.92 3.83 -0.09 0.282 0.324 2. Human beings have the right to modify the natural environment to fit their needs 3.12 3.29 0.17 0.116 0.178 3. When humans interfere with nature, disastrous consequences often occur. 3.81 4.05 0.24 0.035 0.082 4. The Earth has enough natural resources if we learned how to use them. 2.17 1.86 -0.31 0.012 0.017 5. Human ingenuity will ensure that we do not make the Earth habitable. 3.35 3.56 0.21 0.153 0.127 6. Humans are seriously abusing the environment. 4.56 4.83 0.27 0.001 0.003 7. The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrial nations. 4.00 4.05 0.05 0.509 0.391 8. Despite our special abilities, human beings are still subject to the laws of nature. 3.97 4.12 0.14 0.108 0.176 9. Earth is like a spaceship with very limited space and resources. 3.68 3.65 -0.03 0.740 0.522 10. The so-called "ecological crisis" facing humanity has been greatly exaggerated. 4.78 4.27 0.49 0.000 0.000 11. Human beings were called to rule over the rest of nature. 3.94 4.05 0.12 0.323 0.522 12. If things continue their current course, we will experience an ecological catastrophe of great proportions soon. 4.21 4.31 0.10 0.392 0.486 Table 5. Results obtained for each question in groups A and B in February and June, observed differences and statistical significance of the differences. Statistically significant differences are identified by *. The results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the signs test revealed that both groups, A (consisting of 31 students who uploaded photos) and group B (consisting of 44 students who did not upload photos to Geophotopedia), were significantly different. Specifically, the group of participants who uploaded their own landscape photos to the Geophotopedia repository (group A) exhibited statistically significant changes in four survey questions, while the group that did not participate in this activity (group B) displayed statistically significant changes in only two questions as determined by the Wilcoxon test and one question as determined by the rank test (Wilcoxon, 1992). Significant differences were found for the group that uploaded photos to the Geophotopedia (Group A) in questions 2, 4, 5, and 10 (representing four of the five dimensions of the questions: Anti-anthropocentrism, Growth limits, Rejection of exceptionalism, and Possibility of ecocrisis). Significant differences were found in questions 6, 8, and 10 (dimensions of Possibility of ecocrisis and Rejection of exceptionalism) for the group that did not participate in the Geophotopedia (Group B). Question number Geophotopedia (Group A) No Geophotopedia (Group B) Average Difference (Jun-Feb) Wilkoxon Sig Sign test Sig Average Difference (Jun-Feb) Wilkoxon Sig Sign test Sig Feb Jun Feb Jun 1 4.00 3.97 -0.03 0.617 0.581 3.87 3.74 -0.13 0.310 0.271 2 3.10 3.58 0.48 0.011* 0.007* 3.13 3.09 -0.04 0.882 0.432 3 3.97 4.26 0.29 0.088 0.096 3.70 3.91 0.22 0.173 0.262 4 2.39 1.58 -0.81 0.001* 0.001* 2.02 2.04 0.02 0.956 0.423 5 3.32 3.74 0.42 0.059 0.041* 3.37 3.43 0.07 0.775 0.430 6 4.65 4.84 0.19 0.084 0.219 4.50 4.83 0.33 0.007* 0.006* 7 3.87 4.10 0.23 0.152 0.180 4.09 4.02 -0.07 0.783 0.588 8 3.81 3.84 0.03 0.830 0.999 4.09 4.30 0.22 0.049* 0.058 9 3.55 3.65 0.10 0.676 0.999 3.76 3.65 -0.11 0.322 0.180 10 3.97 4.65 0.68 0.001* 0.001* 3.65 4.02 0.37 0.025* 0.006* 11 4.13 4.45 0.32 0.079 0.143 3.80 3.78 -0.02 0.811 0.416 12 4.26 4.58 0.32 0.140 0.16 4.17 4.13 -0.04 0.683 0.500 It should be noted that both groups only matched in presenting significant differences for question 10, having its highest difference (0.68 in Group A and 0.37 in Group B). Significant differences were found in questions 3, 4, 6, and 10 for the whole group (A+B) (Table 2). Question 10 showed the highest positive difference. The only significant negative difference was found in question 4, which was also observed in the same direction in group A, with a considerably higher value of -0.81, indicating a more pronounced negative shift than in the entire group and a very significant difference. 5.Discussion Interpretation of results The results of this study suggest that participating in a Physical Geography course and the additional task of uploading and labelling personal landscape photographs to a repository can have an impact on students' ecological attitudes as measured by the NEP. Specifically, the results indicate that three of the 12 survey questions showed statistically significant differences in ecological consciousness between the initial and final surveys among the sample of 77 students, thereby accepting the research hypothesis. Furthermore, the results suggest that the handling of photographs, including tagging and categorizing, may have led to greater engagement and deeper understanding of the natural world. This was evidenced by the fact that the group of students who completed this task (group A) exhibited more and greater changes in four of the survey questions compared to the group who did not participate in the task (group B). The change is particularly significant in the dimension of Possibility of ecocrisis, and specifically in question 10 (the so-called "ecological crisis" facing humanity has not been greatly exaggerated). In addition, there are significantly greater differences in group A than in B. The increase in knowledge about the physical environment provided by learning in the course seems to make them more aware of current phenomena such as climate change, deforestation, land use changes, pollution, etc. that can endanger the balance of the planet. The survey revealed a statistically significant negative change (-0.31) between February and June in only one question - Question 4, which pertains to the Limits of growth ("The Earth has enough natural resources if we just learn to use them"). Moreover, a larger difference was observed between the average change scores of group A and group B in this question, with a change of -0.88. Previous literature (Grenstad, 1999) has also observed this difference in results concerning this question compared to the rest of the NEP questionnaire. The authors of this study consider Question 4 to present some ambiguity, as ecologically oriented positions can hold opposing values. One position is the belief that resources are limited, leading to the need for increased resource conservation and a low score on the Likert scale. On the other hand, another position is the belief that humans have the capability to manage limited resources, resulting in a high score on the Likert scale. The results suggest that the students understand the question differently depending on the activities they engaged in, with some placing more emphasis on the limits of natural resources while others emphasize the human capacity to care for them. Hypothesis validation The results of this study support the initial hypothesis that continued work with landscape photographs during the course leads to an increase in ecological consciousness among students. The authors propose several potential explanations for these phenomena. First, uploading photographs to a repository and labelling them may increase students' engagement with the subject, leading to greater appreciation of Henderson, F. M. and T.J. Rickard. 1972. Space Photographs as a Geographic Teaching Aid. Journal of Geography 71(5):307-313. Hollander, M., D.A. Wolfe and E. Chicken. 2013. Nonparametric statistical methods. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Jennings, S. A. 2006. A content comparison of six physical geography textbooks spanning a century. International Research in Geographical & Environmental Education 15(1):1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/irgee183.0 Jickling, B. and A.E. Wals. 2008. Globalization and environmental education: Looking beyond sustainable development. Journal of Curriculum Studies 40(1):1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270701684667 Jones, S. 2000. Is it looking or seeing? The use of visual resources in geography teaching. Geography 85(3):252-261. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40573706 Kahraman, C. 2016. Role of Geography in environmental education. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 2(4) 121-125. https://dx.doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.2.20001-4 Kerawalla, L., K. Littleton, E. Scanlon, T. Collins, M. Gaved, P. Mulholland and C. Blake. 2012. Doing Geography: A multimodal analysis of students' situated improvisational interpretation during fieldtrips. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 12:78-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.05.001 Kim, M. 2019. Fostering Environmental Sensitivity by Observing Everyday Environment, Journal of Geography, 118(4): 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1564351 Khan, S. F., U. Kamp and L.A. Owen. 2013. Documenting five years of landsliding after the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, using repeat photography. Geomorphology 197:45-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.04.033 Korchergin, A. N., Y.G. Markov and N.G. Vasilyev. 1987. Ecological Knowledge and Consciousness: Features of Formation. Novosibirsk. Kostova, Z., E. Vladimirova and B. Radoynovska. 2011. The environmental concern of ninegrade students from a secondary professional school. Bulgarian Journal of Science & Education Policy 5:178-218. Malde, H. E. 1973. Geologic bench marks by terrestrial photography. US Geological Survey Journal of Research 12:193-206. Mann, H. B. and D. R. Whitney. 1947. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18:50–60. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177730491 Markovich, D. 2001. Globalization and environmental education. Sociological Studies 1:17-24. McKeown-ice, R. 1994. Environmental Education: A Geographical Perspective. Journal of Geography, 93(1): 40-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221349408979684 Medley, K. E. and L.M. Gramlich-kaufman. 2001. A Landscape Guide in Environmental Education. Journal of Geography 100(2): 69-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221340108978419 Moiseev, N. N. 1998. Once Again on the Problem of Coevolution. Russian Studies in Philosophy 37(3):63–72. https://doi.org/10.2753/RSP1061-1967370363 Momsen, J. H. 2000. Gender Differences in Environmental Concern and Perception. Journal of Geography 99(2): 47-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221340008978956 Momsen, J. H. 2007. Gender and biodiversity: a new approach to linking environment and development. Geography Compass 1(2):149-162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749- 8198.2007.00011.x Morgan, J. 2003. Imagined country: National environmental ideologies in school geography textbooks. Antipode 35(3):444-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00334 Nairn, K. 1996. Parties on geography fieldtrips: embodied fieldwork? Women's Studies Journal 12:86-97. Putrawan, I. M. 2015. Measuring New Environmental Paradigm Based on Students Knowledge about Ecosystem and Locus of Control. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 11(2):325-333. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1336a Richard, V. M. and M.K. Lahman. 2015. Photo-elicitation: Reflexivity on method, analysis, and graphic portraits. International Journal of Research & Method in Education 38(1):3-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2013.843073 Rose, G. 2008. Using photographs as illustrations in human geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 32(1):151-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260601082230 Ryan, A. W., & Aasetre, J. 2021. Digital storytelling, student engagement and deep learning in Geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 45(3), 380-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2020.1833319 Schleicher, K. 1989. Beyond environmental education: The need for ecological awareness. International Review of Education 35(3) 257-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00598942 Shumilina, A. and N. Anсiferova. 2023. Mechanisms for developing and shaping environmental consciousness in the globalised world. E3S Web of Conferences 420 (06023). https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202342006023 Sidaway, J. D. 2002. Photography as geographical fieldwork. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 26(1):95-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260120110395 Sidaway, J. D. and T. Hall. 2018. Geography textbooks, pedagogy and disciplinary traditions. Area 50(1):34-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12397 Siegel, S. and N. J. Castellan. 1972. Estadística no paramétrica aplicada a las ciencias de la conducta. Mexico: Trillas. Soini, K., H. Vaarala and E. Pouta. 2012. Residents’ sense of place and landscape perceptions at the rural–urban interface. Landscape and Urban Planning 104(1):124-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.10.002 Tal, R. T. 2004. Using a field trip to a wetland as a guide for conceptual understanding in environmental education–A case study of a pre-service teacher’s research. Chemistry Education Research and Practice 52:127-142. https://doi.org/10.1039/B4RP90016B Tal, T. 2012. Out-of-school: Learning experiences, teaching and students’ learning. In Second international handbook of science education, ed. B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin and C. J. McRobbie 1109–1122. Springer Taskin, O. 2009. The environmental attitudes of Turkish senior high school students in the context of postmaterialism and the new environmental paradigm. International Journal of Science Education 31(4):481-502. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701691689 Ting, D. H. and C.F.C. Cheng. 2017. Developing pro-environmental behaviour: Ecotourism fieldtrip and experiences. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 18(7):1212-1229. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-03-2016-0052 Triola, M. F. 2004. Probabilidad y estadística. Mexico: Pearson educación. Wheeler, J. O. 1985. Creating local field trips: Seeing geographical principles through empirical eyes. Journal of Geography 84(5):217-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221348508979136 Wilcoxon, F. 1992. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. New York: Springer. Yasar, O. and M. Seremet. 2007. A comparative analysis regarding pictures included in secondary school geography textbooks taught in Turkey. International Research in Geographical & Environmental Education 16(2):157-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/irgee216.0