RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, AWARENESS AND

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP TOWARDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AMONG

THE SECONDARY SCHOOOL PRINCIPAL IN KEDAH AND PENANG.

Azizi Muda, Masitah Hj. Mohammad Yusof, Mohamed Khaidir Alias and Noriati A.Rashid

Faculty of Environmrntal Studies

Universiti Putra Malaysia
43400 Serdang, Selangor.
2010

Abstract

Environmental Education aim to help the future generation to manage life and ensure prosperity of their future. One
way to implement Environmental Education is to integrate Environmental Education in other subjects through
classroom instruction. Even though an environmental value that needs to be inculcated was listed according to
subjects, the quality of its implementation depends on the awareness and commitment of the principal as the highest
leader in a school. Principle leadership practice is an important factor that influences the success of the
implementation of Environmental Education. A study on the relationship between level of knowledge, attitude,
awareness and instructional leadership of secondary school principal was conducted on 60 principal of Kedah and
Penang. The results show that the level of principal knowledge are moderate (M%=54.8), principal attitude towards
the environment are positive (M=4.15), level of principal awareness are high (M%= 71.15, M=4.45 and M=4.37)
and the level of environmental instructional leadership are moderate (M=3.37). Study also shows that there are no
significant relationship between the level of knowledge and attitude, awareness and environmental instructional
leadership. However, research shows that there was a high and positive relationship, r=0.723 with p= 0.001
between attitude and awareness of principal towards the environment. In relation to this, a few suggestions is put
forward to increase the level of knowledge and principal instructional leadership towards environmental education.

Introduction

Since the Tbilisi Declaration in 1978, education has been accepted as the basic tool to control the
environment and sustainable development. Tbilisi Declaration has defined Environmental Education as
the process of learning that can enhance knowledge and public awareness related to the environment and
the associated challenges, developing expertise and skills necessary to tackle the challenges, develop
attitudes, motivation and commitment in making environmentally responsible action (Tunku Khalkausar,
2006).

Schools became one of the main ways to tackle environmentally related problems (Moroye,
2005). Education related to the environment is important to enhance awareness towards the quality of the
environment. Environmental Education help future generations to control their lives and have a
prosperous future (Perikleous, 2004). One way to implement Environmental Education is to integrate
environmental education within the other subjects in the process of teaching and learning in the
classroom.
In Malaysia, this matter has already been formally introduced through the publication of
Teachers' Handbook for Environmental Education across the curriculum for primary and secondary
schools (1998) by the Curriculum Development Division (CDC) of the Ministry of Education. For pre-
school level the book was published in 2005. However, according to Susan Pudin, Koji Tagi and

1
Ambigavathi Periasamy (2005), the effectiveness of its implementation is still limited and the level of
implementation is not the same from one school to another school. They stated that;

“….many strategies and programmers have been initiated to integrate environmental

education into the national education curriculum. Although the Ministry of Education
provides a guidebook on environmental education to all schools, the implementation has
been limited and uneven….”

Studies by Aini, Nurizan and Fakhru'l-Razi (2007), found that among the problems identified in
the implementation of environmental education in schools in Malaysia are;

• not all teachers use the handbook which was prepared to teach Environmental Education
• the handbook provided was not able to help teachers to fully implement the activities in Environmental
Education;
• time constraints in completing the school syllabus
• problems in financial allocation

In this case, although the environmental issues that need to be taught are listed according to
subjects and under the guidelines of Ministry of Education, the quality of implementation is highly
dependent on the awareness, commitment and instructional leadership of principal (Hotinli, 2004).
According to Abdul Ghani, Abd. Rahman and Zohir (2008), instructional leadership or also
known as teaching leadership is defined as a process to design and translate the vision into the formal
curriculum by optimizing all available resources through education strategy with the acquisition of all the
teaching-learning experience and ensure that education plans is implemented effectively based on the
vision that was built. In the context of schools, instructional leadership is the ability of a leader or
teaching leaders to focus on leadership, encouragement and support for teachers and students in order to
overcome problems improve and enhance teaching and learning in schools. Instructional leaders should
also have skills related to the implementation of the curriculum at school level. Meanwhile, instructional
leadership behaviors are efforts, actions and practices processes that form the commitment of a leader or
instructional leaders in the process of improving the teaching and learning in schools.
By implementing environmental education programs in schools, principals are expected to play
an important role in enhancing knowledge, awareness and changing attitudes of students in tackling
environmental issues so they can take part in efforts to actively protect the environment in line with the
National Education Philosophy and the National Curriculum, Ministry of Education Malaysia.

Literature Review

Knowledge about the environment must be understood by all levels of society, especially students
at school. According to Ahmad Badri Mohammad (1987), the main cause of problems related to
environmental issues is the lack of knowledge as a result of human ignorance of the processes about the
earth itself.
Studies by Susan Pudin et al., (2005), found that teachers are not quite capable in implementing
environmental education and not confident and creative enough in developing environmental programs or
activities. Moreover, Krantz (2002), found that teachers teach only the environmental chapters which
they are familiar with while chapters that are difficult and scientifically based are given less attention.

2
This is because teachers do not have enough knowledge and confidence to teach Environmental
Education.
Studies by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (2003),
found that the level of environmental awareness among the Malaysian society are still at early level. Lim
Siaw Fong (2005) found that the level of environmental awareness in our students is still low. Similarly
for the teachers, although they agreed the importance of implementation of Environmental Education,
they are still not ready to implement and integrate environmental education in the subjects of their options
(Petergem, 2005; Periasamy, 2000; Meredith, 2002; Kunz, 1997; Pan Khang Aun, 1996; Ham, 1987; and
Wilke, 1980). Furthermore, Skanavis and Saari study (2002) found that only a small number of teachers
who are familiar with Environmental Education and its teaching processes in the formal classroom.
These studies clearly indicate that the level of knowledge and understanding of environmental
issues and environmental education among school students and teachers in Malaysia is still at a low and
medium level.
Hence, if this is the case, what is the role played by the Principal as the top leaders and managers
of curriculum in teaching Environmental Education? According to Aini et., al. (2007);

“…successful implementation of environmental education depends greatly on the

commitment, efforts and the level of enthusiasm of the school principals and teachers.”

The study of the level of knowledge of the environment of principal as school leaders must be
conducted to assess the role of principal as instructional leaders in enhancing knowledge and inculcate
environmental education among students and teachers schools. This is because the principal is a leader of
the organization (Mohd. Suhaimi, 2007) and the role models and mastermind of the school organization
(Abdul Ghani and Aziah Ismail, 2005).
Leadership qualities of a principle have the ability to enhance academic achievement including
student achievement in inculcating environmental values. Report by the Committee of Schools Education
Standard (1982) states that principals play a vital role on students' academic achievement in schools.
Principals, who manage many learning activities, maintain effective supervision of schools, act as
consultant, advisor and coordinator of instructional programs are able to improve achievement. In other
words, principals must adopt the role as instructional leaders and not just focus on administration alone.
The problem that is often encountered is that principals’ leadership and management ability in the
implementation of curriculum and instruction is not yet established. Many principals in Malaysia give
priority to administrative tasks and do not have enough time to conduct instructional innovation in
schools. This behavior is typical of an individual who has acquired new experiences or new
responsibilities where previous experiences or responsibilities will be forgotten. According to Mohd
Salleh (1999), when a teacher has become the principal, he began to neglect the responsibilities as an
instructor.
In order to achieve sustainable improvements, school principals should change the views of
capitalistic and materialistic thinking to thinking that involves the concept of interdependence of
humanity and the environment (Khair, 2007). This view is also supported by Hargreaves and Fink,
(2006);

3
 “Sustainable leaders sustain others as they pursue this course together. Sustainable
leaders also sustain themselves; attending to their own renewal and not sacrificing
themselves too much as they serve their community.”

To become sustainable leaders, principals should have deep understanding and knowledge about
the environment, show a positive attitude towards the environment and have high level of awareness in
the effort of preserving the environment. Hence, through the subject of Environmental Education in the
schools, sustainable leadership can be initiated. Environmental Education refers to learning that is
required to maintain and improve quality of life for future generations. According Rohaty et., al. (2005);

“Environmental Education is a way of ensuring a better quality of life for everyone now
and the future generation to come.”

The mission of Environmental Education is to find a balance between human welfare and
economic development with cultural traditions with respect for natural resources. This mission is
consistent with the statement by the United Nations (2006) which states that the Environmental Education
refers to a lifelong process of learning that can developed in community that are engage with problem
solving, scientifically and socially literate and have the individuals and groups commitment and
responsibility.

Research Method

This is a descriptive exploratory study of the secondary school principals in Kedah and Penang.
According to Mohd Majid Konting (2005), descriptive research aims to explain a phenomenon that is
happening. While the exploratory method is one way to collect specific information about a population
(Blake & Champion, 1976).
Questionnaire survey was used to identify the level of knowledge, attitudes and awareness of the
principal towards Environmental Education and their level of environmental instructional leadership. This
study further review relationship between level of environmental knowledge, attitudes and awareness and
principal instructional leadership. The instrument to test the level of knowledge, attitude and awareness is
adopted from New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) developed up by Riley Dunlap, Kent Van Liere, Angela
Mertig and Robert Jones in Valarie (2005) and for instructional leadership is adopted from Hallinger and
Murphy model (1985) Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (PIMRS).

4
Result and Findings

Level of knowledge concerning education and environmental issues

Figure 1: Bar graph showing the number of knowledge items according to level

From the analysis result indicates the level of knowledge about education and environmental
issues is high (level 4), moderate (level 3), low (level 2) and weak (level 1) according to the level of
difficulty of the question. Based on figure 2, it is overwhelming because out of 20 items, 9 items located
at a high level, 3 items at a moderate level, 5 items located in low level and 3 items are in the weak level.
However, despite the overall 9 items located at a high level, it can be concluded the level of
education and knowledge about environmental issues among secondary school principals in the state of
Kedah and Penang is moderate because the average is M%=54.85.

Attitudes towards the environment

Figure 2: Bar graph shows the number of attitude items according to the level.

Based on the analysis that has been done, it was found that there are only two aspects that showed a
neutral attitude of respondent towards the environment while the remainder is positive. This means that
the attitude of secondary school principals in Kedah and Penang to the environment is positive.

5
Level of environmental awareness

Figure 3: Bar graph shows the number of awareness items according to the level.

Inference that can be made is the level of environmental awareness of secondary school principals
in Kedah and Penang to the environment is high (M%=71.1).

Level of environmental instructional leadership

Figure 4: Bar graph shows the number of leadership functions according to levels.

Based on the analysis that has been done, it can be concluded that the level of instructional
leadership practices of secondary school principals environment in Kedah and Penang are moderate
(M=3.37).

The relationship between level of knowledge, attitude and awareness to the level of leadership

Pearson Correlation test and Spearman `s Rho was used to observe the association or relationship
between two variables. This test is only explaining the strength of the relationship and also whether there
is a significant relationship or not between level of knowledge, attitude, awareness and level of the
principal instructional leadership. Significant level used is the confidence level of p ≤ 0.05.

Following is a test to study the relationship between the level of principals’ environmental
knowledge, attitudes and awareness and principal instructional leadership. In particular, there are six

6
relationship that was studied which are relationship between the level of knowledge and attitudes;
relationship between the level of knowledge and awareness; relationships between level of knowledge
and leadership; relationship between attitudes and awareness, the relationship between attitude and
leadership, and the relationship between awareness and leadership.
Inference correlation analysis is done to measure the strength of the relationship; positive or
negative, followed by the strength of relationship; high or low between two variables. Pearson correlation
model and Spearman's Rho was selected to determine the correlation. Table 1 shows the relationship
between the level of knowledge, attitude, awareness and principals’ leadership.

Table 1: The relationship between level of knowledge, attitude, awareness and leadership of
secondary school principal in Kedah and Penang.

Correlation
No Result Relationship p-value
Index, r
1. Knowledge and attitude -0.153 0.420 (p>0.05)
2. Knowledge and Awareness -0.130 0.492 (p>0.05)
3. Knowledge and Leadership 0.083 0.663 (p>0.05)
4. Attitude and Awareness 0.723 0.001** (p<0.05)
5. Attitude and Leadership 0.203 0.281 (p>0.05)
6. Attitude and Leadership 0.122 0.522 (p>0.05)

Based on research findings as shown in Table 1 above, it clearly shows that there are no
significant relationship between level of knowledge and attitudes, awareness and environmental
instructional leadership among principals in secondary schools in Kedah and Penang. However there is a
significant relationship exists between principals’ environmental attitudes and awareness.
Inference correlation analysis showed that the value of correlation coefficient r is high for the
relationship between attitudes and awareness which is 7.23 and the value p is less than 0.05. This value
indicates there is a positive relationship between attitudes and awareness which is high level of
correlation. The analysis above also shows that the correlation coefficient r for other relationship is very
low and can be ignored because all correlation coefficient r is below 0.20 and all p values are greater than
0.05. These values indicate that there is no significant relationship between level of knowledge and
attitudes, knowledge and awareness, knowledge and leadership, attitude and leadership, and awareness
and leadership. Analysis also shows that there is a negative relationship between attitudes, knowledge and
awareness.

Discussion

Findings from this study shows that the level of environmental knowledge among Kedah and
Penang school principals is moderate (M%=54.85), their attitude towards the environment is positive
(M=4.15), their level of environmental awareness is high (M%=71.15, M=4.45 and M=4.37) and their
level of environmental instructional leadership practices is also moderate (M=3.37).
It can be concluded that attitude and awareness towards the environment are not affected by the
level of knowledge of the school principals. As shown in the study, even though the school principals

7
have positive attitude towards the environment and have high level of awareness but the level of their
knowledge towards the environment are moderate.
Research findings also show that there are no significant relationship between level of
knowledge, attitude and awareness with school principal environmental instructional leadership practices.
Although leadership factors play an important role in influencing principal behavior in implementing
Environmental Education, the results of this study clearly shows that the principals do not show
appropriate leadership practices in implementing Environmental Education in schools. Nevertheless, there
is a significant relationship between school principal’s attitudes and awareness towards the environment.

Conclusion and Suggestions

School leaders are important in developing educational institutions in Malaysia (Shahril, 2007a).
Results from previous studies show that leadership practices influence the effectiveness of the
implementation of programs in schools (Hussein, 2008; Shahril, 2007b; Sergiovanni, 1995; Glassman,
1986). However, results from this study show that school principal leadership practices especially the
instructional leadership do not affect the effectiveness of the implementation of Environmental Education.
This means that school principals still do not take into consideration the environmental factors or in the
process of teaching and learning in the classroom.
Accordingly, several measures have been proposed to enhance the level of environmental
knowledge and awareness among the schools principals in Malaysia. Among them, principals must do a
lot of readings, have interest in exploring areas of the environment and environmental issues, and capable
and skilled in inculcating environmental values. As leaders, they must not only increase knowledge about
national environmental issues but also issues outside the country which are global and scientific in nature,
using and all existing technology information.
In addition, schools must also provide access to information relating to the environment and
increase environmental reference materials in school library such as books, magazines, posters, brochures
and so forth. These materials will attract students and teachers interest to learn with more depth about
environmental issues like global warming, ozone layer depletion, acid rain, greenhouse effect and impact
resulting from environmental problems such as melting glaciers in the north pole, the sharp increase in
temperature, climate change and climate uncertainty and wildlife extinction.
The ministry or the State Education Department could work together with the Department of
Environment (DOE) to conduct lectures, seminars or environmental courses in schools. In addition,
schools can conduct activities such as environmental week, recycling campaigns, posters, painting and
essay writing competitions, innovation from disposed items, mural painting, or reciting environmentally
related poetry.
Schools may also involve external parties, especially private agencies such as PETRONAS, Shell,
Exxon-Mobil and parents in an effort to raise awareness towards environmental education. These efforts
must be expanded to ensure that environmental education as a cross curriculum subject can achieve the
goals and can be implemented effectively in line with the National Philosophy of Education and the
National Curriculum, Ministry of Education.

8
References

Abdul Ghani Abdullah dan Aziah Ismail. (2005). Kesediaan Memperkasa Pendidikan Pembangunan
Lestari oleh Pengurus Pendidikan Sekolah: Satu Kajian Kes, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Pulau
Pinang.

Ahmad Badri Mohammad. (1987). Perspektif Persekitaran. Kuala Lumpur: Fajar Bakti.

Aini Mat Said, Nurizan Yahaya and Fakhru’l-Razi Ahmadun. (2007). Environmental comprehension and
participation of Malaysian secondary school students. Environmental Education Research, Vol. 13, No. 1,
February 2007, pp. 17–31.

Alias Baba (1992). Statistik Penyelidikan Dalam Pendidikan Dan Sains Sosial. Bangi:Penerbitan UKM.

Blake, J. A. & Champion, D. J. (1976). Method and Issues in Social Research. New York: John Willey
and Sons.

Glasman, N. S. (1986). "Evaluation-Based Leadership: School Administration In Contemporary

Perspective." Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Instructional leadership and school socio-economic status: A
preliminary investigation. Administrator’s Notebook. 31(5): 1-4.

Ham, S.M. and D. Sewing. (1987). Barriers to environmental education. Journal of Environmental
Education. 19(2): 17 – 24.

Hotinli, G. (2004). Environmental Education in Turkey. Dlm. MIO-ECSDE. The status of environmental
education in the Mediterranean countries within the formal and non formal educational systems.
Dec.,Issues: 34.

Hussein Mahmood. (2008). Kepemimpinan Dan Keberkesanan Sekolah. Edisi Kedua Kuala Lumpur:
Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia, Laporan Jawatankuasa Mengkaji Taraf Pelajaran di Sekolah-sekolah,

1982.

Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. (1998). Buku Panduan Guru Pendidikan Alam Sekitar Merentas
Kurikulum KBSR dan KBSM, Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum, KPM, Kuala Lumpur.

Pengajaran Pembelajaran Di Dalam Kelas Oleh Pengetua/Guru Besar Sekolah. KP(BS) 8591/ 11(77).

Khair bin Mohamad Yusof. (2007). Amalan-amalan kepimpinan untuk penambahbaikan sekolah yang
mapan. Seminar Kepengetuaan Kebangsaan Ke-IV, Universiti Malaya. Kuala Lumpur.

Krantz, P.D. (2002). A study of the impact of environmental education workshops on teachers’ attitude
and efficacy. Disertasi Ph.D. University of Missouri-Columbia.Umi ProQuest Digital Dissertations.

9
Kunz, D and Ham, S.H. (1997). Toward a Theory of Commitment to Environmental Education Teaching.
The Journal of Environmental Education. Vol. 28 (2): 25 – 32.

Lau Ki Chuan (2000). Tinjauan amalan faktor-faktor pengurusan sekolah beskesan dalam menentukan
tahap pengurusan sekolah di sebuah sekolah menengah dalam daerah Batu Pahat, Johor. Tesis Sarjana:
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Lim Siaw Fong. (2005). Environment Management and Environmental Education in four schools in the
Klang Valley. Unpublished Master of Environmental Technology. Faculty of Science: University of
Malaya.

Meredith, J., Coughlin, D., Fortner, R., Danville, D.G., Mc Claughherty, C., Ramey, L., Somers,L dan
Todt, D. (2002). Environmental Education in Ohio Pre-Service Teacher Education: A Research Report.
A Project of Environmental Education Ohio, The Centre for Environmental in Ohio.

Mohd Majid Konting. (2005). Kaedah Penyelidikan Pendidikan, Edisi Ketujuh. Kuala Lumpur; Dewan
Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Mohd. Rosli Mohd. Othman (2000). Hubungan kepimpinan instruksional dengan iklim sekolah. Tesis
Sarjana: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Mohd Salleh Lebar. (1999). Kepimpinan pengajaran dalam Isu Kepengetuaan: Antara Dilema dan
Kekeliruan, Seminar Kebangsaan Pembangunan Pendidikan, Universiti Malaya. Kuala Lumpur.

Mohd Suhaimi Mohamed Ali, Sharifah Md Nor dan Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie. (2007). Amalan
kepimpinan pengajaran pengetua sekolah menengah luar bandar. Kertas kerja Seminar Nasional Bidang
dan Kepimpinan Pendidikan Ke-14. Institut Aminuddin Baki, Genting Highlands.

Moroye. C.M. (2005). Common ground: an ecological perpective on teaching and learning. Curriclum
and Teaching dialogue 7 (1/2): 123-129.

Pan Khang Aun. (eds.). (1996). Strengthening Development of Environmental Education in Malaysia.
Proceeding First National Workshop on Environmental Education. Kuala Lumpur: Department of
Wildlife and National Park Peninsular Malaysia., United Nations Development Programmed an Institute
of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia.

Periasamy, A. (2000). Integration as a form of curriculum reform: The teaching of environmental

education in KBSM Geography in a Malaysian context. PhD Disseratation, University of Queensland,
Australia.

Perikleous. (2004). The Status of Environmental Education in Cyprus Today. Dlm. MIO-ECSDE.

Petegem, P.V., Blieck, .A, Imbrecht, I dan Van Haut, T. (2005). Implementing environmental education
in pre-service teacher training. Environmental Education Research. Vol. 11, No. 2: 161 – 171.

Rohaty Mohd. Mazjub. (2005). Strategic Planning of Education for World Peace. The 5thComparative
Education Society of Asia Biennial Conference 2005 (CESA 2005) organized by Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia: Bangi.

10
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1995). The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Inc.

Shahril @ Charil Marzuki, Yahya Bin Don. (2007a). Kecerdasan emosi dan kepemimpinan pendidikan
dalam pembentukan sekolah berkesan. Jurnal Pendidikan. Universiti Malaya. Kuala Lumpur.

Shahril@Charil bin H], Marzuki. (2007b). Pembentukan Sekolah Cemerlang. Jurnal Pendidikan.
Universiti Malaya. Kuala Lumpur.

Skanavis, C, & Sarri, E. (2002). The role of environmental education as a tool for environmental
management in Cyprus: strategies and activities. Environmental Management and Health. 13(5): 529-
544.

Susan P., Tagi Koji., Periasamy A., (2005) Environmental education in Malaysia and Japan: a
comparative assessment. Available online a thttp://www.ceeindia.org/esf/download/paper20.pdf.
(accessed 3 Ogos 2009).

Tunku Khalkausar Tunku Fathali. (2006). Environmnetal education and awareness. IMPAK. Issue: 4,
DOE Malaysia.

United Nations. (2006). Agenda 21. htttp://www.un.org.htm. 21 Mei 2009.

United Nation Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. (2003). CSD Regional
Implementation Meeting for the Asia. Bangkok, Thailand, 27-28 October 2003.

Valerie Idette Stein. (2005). Relationships between Decision-Making Styles and Environmental attitudes
among Military Leaders. A dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
Doctor of Management in Organizational Leadership. University of Phoenix.

Wilke, R.J. (1980). An analysis of three strategies designed to influence teacher use of, knowledge of, and
attitudes toward educational resource use in environmental education. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation. Southern Illinois University of Carbondale.

Zulkafli Arifin, (2000).Pengaruh kepimpinan prestasi pengetua terhadap prestasi akademik pelajar: Satu
tinjauan di sekolah-sekolah menengah. Tesis Sarjana: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

11