生态旅游环境教育效果评价实证研究

A Case Study on the Effect Evaluation of Ecotourism Environmental Education

环境教育研究是生态旅游研究领域的重要主题之一,而生态旅游环境教育的效果评价是该领域的一个富有挑战性的研究议题,研究结果将对生态旅游环境教育的开展和效果的优化具有重要的启示意义。文章采用实验对比法,设计实验组与对照组两个样本组,对前者在实验控制的状态下施加事先设计好的环境教育干预,对后者,使之处于惯常情况下;然后运用前期研究成果来测量和评价生态旅游环境教育干预的成效。实验结果表明:在宏观尺度即第一层指标中,实验组综合得分的平均分、中位数、标准差、最高分、最低分均高于对照组,其中平均分的等级高出对照组将近2个级差;实验组对环境教育的满意度也明显高于对照组;实验组的旅游者"生态旅游者程度"自我评价情况要远远优于对照组。在中观尺度第二层中的7个二级指标中,实验组除在技能、行为、意愿3项指标上微高或稍高于后者外,在知识、意识、伦理观念、评价与建议4项指标均上明显或非常明显高于后者。上述结果均在一定程度上印证了环境教育干预的积极作用。多因素方差分析表明,环境教育干预、样本个体的受教育程度、旅游动机和"游前"旅游经历4个因素是造成上述差异的主要因素。

Effect evaluation of environmental education has become an important and challenging theme in ecotourism research, and the result is of value both practically and theoretically. An experimental comparison research was conducted in this thesis with the samples divided into 2 groups： compared group and experimental group with the latter being exerted pre-designed environmental education intervention. Then, the closely related published research results ＂the indexes, approaches and model of effect evaluation on environmental education in ecotourism＂ were applied to measure and evaluate the effect of environmental education in the case study zone. Results show in the 1st level indexes, the mean, median, standard deviation, maximum, and minimum were respectively 43.49, 36.52, 27.40, 100.00, and 10.80 in the experimental group, and 33.40, 24.60, 21.52, 80.94, and 9.21 in the compared group, with the former being 10.09, 1 I. 92, 5.88, 19.06, and 1.59 more than the latter respectively, which means the effect of ecotourism environmental education in the former group was ＂very bad＂ while that in the latter group was ＂ extremely bad＂ The cumulative percentage of ＂ very satisfied＂ and ＂satisfied＂ in the experimental group was as high as 80% while that in the compared group was only as low as 19. 32%. The mean of tourist＇s self-assessment score of ＂ecotourist degree＂ by means of subjective self-assessment method in experimental group was 73.46, where as that in the compared group was 56.62, which presents the relatively obvious advantages of the former group over the latter group. In the case of 2nd level indexes composed of knowledge, consciousness, ethics opinion, comment and suggestion, skill, behavior, and willingness, the mean scores were respectively 10.25, 1 I. 40, 8.79, 7.83, 2.32, 2.39, and 2.74 （for the experimental group） and 8.22, 8.92, 6.84, 6.49, 1.69, 2.32, and 2.35 （for compared group） , which indicates that the experimental group was only a little higher than the compared group in the scores of such indexes as skill, behavior and willingness, yet much higher in such indexes as knowledge, consciousness, ethics opinion, and comment and suggestion. The above comparison shows that initiative environmental education intervention had some positive effect on the improvement of ecotourism environmental education, yet the effect was still limited, which shows that there existed other factors that might influence the final effect. Both ANOVA and Chi-square tests show, with p = 0.10, the degree of formal education, travel motivation and pre-tour ecotourism experience were all significantly related to the change of the sample＇ s total personal score, which proves that the three factors were the main factors that did influence the effect of environmental education. In the meantime, GLM ANOVA shows environmental education intervention and the above-mentioned 3 factors had a significant influence on the effect of environmental education. However, the interaction effect between and among those 4 indexes was not significant, which proves that they did not influence one another.