A Process of Environmental Education Communication through Community Cultural Activity Area

APA 6th edition
In-text: (Wongpaibool, Rawang, Supapongpichate & Pichayapibool, 2016)
Your Bibliography: Wongpaibool, D., Rawang, W., Supapongpichate, R. & Pichayapibool, P. (2016). A Process of Environmental Education Communication through Community Cultural Activity Area. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(12), 5687-5697.

Harvard
In-text: (Wongpaibool, Rawang, Supapongpichate and Pichayapibool, 2016)
Your Bibliography: Wongpaibool, D., Rawang, W., Supapongpichate, R. and Pichayapibool, P. (2016). A Process of Environmental Education Communication through Community Cultural Activity Area. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(12), pp. 5687-5697.

Chicago 16th edition
In-text: (Wongpaibool, Rawang, Supapongpichate and Pichayapibool 2016)
Your Bibliography: Wongpaibool, Duangporn, Wee Rawang, Ratchanont Supapongpichate and Pataraboon Pichayapibool (2016). "A Process of Environmental Education Communication through Community Cultural Activity Area". International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 11 (12):5687-5697.

Abstract

The purpose of this research was:

1.To investigate social context, environment, way of life and community culture.

2.To gather the views and opinions regarding environmental conservation and restoration.

3.To synthesize a process of environmental education communication based on community cultural activity area.

4.To evaluate the efficacy of the environmental education communication processes.

This research uses Participatory Action Research (PAR) along with a Civil Society Forum.

The results revealed that the environmental situation in the community was most likely changed from rural to urban and has environmental problems, there was the process of community cultural area (CCA) but with lack of local people participation. The local people needed to restore and conserve their environmental situation and way of life; of Thai - Mon culture for the next generation. The overall environmental education learning level and process of environmental education communication levels were located at moderate levels of 3.37 average with 0.64 standard deviation and at 3.20 average with 0.56 standard deviation respectively. Therefore, the element of the process of environmental education communication was as follows: Sender: the committee, the performers and organizers of Amphaeng Community cultural activity area. Message: community identity, community story, community problem, the needs of local people. Chanel: community cultural area activities. Receiver: local people. Impact: restoration and conservation of their environment, way of life, community biodiversity, and a better quantity of life. The evaluation of the efficacy of the environmental education communication processes were located at a high level of 4.60 in 6 projects established by local people.

Keywords: Communication process, environmental education, participation, community cultural area, Rim khlong Ampheang, Thai-Mon culture

References

Aroson, E. and Golden, B.W. (1962). The Effect of Relevant and Irrelevant Accept of communication Credibility on Opinion Change. Journal of Personality 30: 135-136.

Barnett, H.G. (1993). “Communication for development in Latin America: a forty-year appraisal” in Nostbakken, D. & Morrow, C. (1993). Cultural expression in the global village. Penang, Malaysia: Southbound. Pp. 10&11

Crowl, Thomas K. (1993). Fundamentals of Educational Research. United States of America: Wm C. Brown Communications, Inc.

Chanthawanich.S. (2551). Methods of qualitative research. 16th Edition. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Printer. [in Thai].

Chin, S.Y. & Quebrel, N. (1991). Project for broadcasting in development: report, Hull, Canada: Canadian International Development Agency.

Filiciano. Gloria. (1983). Training in the Development and Use of Folk Media and Mass Media in Field Level Communication Strategies. UNESCO Report Folk Media and Mass Media in Population Commutation 8 (March): 8

Rogers, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations, 3rd. edition. New York, USA: The Free Press.

Servace, J. (2001). Communication for development: One World, Mutiple Cultures, Cresskill, NJ. Hampton Press.

Servaes, J. (1989). One world, multiple cultures: a new paradigm on communication for development. Leuven, Belgium: Acco

Singhal, A. (2001). Facilitating Community Participation through Communication. New York: Unicef.

Srisopha, A. (1982). Test development. Bangkok: Jutharat. [in Thai].

Thomas, P. (1994). Paticipatory development communication: Philoshophical premises. In S.A. White, K.S. Nair, & J. Ascroft (Eds.) Partivipatory communication: working for Change and Development (pp. 15-32) New Delhi: Sang.

White, S.(1999). The art of facilitating participation: Releasing the power of grassroots communication.

Srisopha, A. (1982). Test development. Bangkok: Jutharat. [in Thai]

UNESCO. (1976). The Belgrade Charter. Connect UNESCO-UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter, 1(1), 2-6.

Uphoff, N. (1985). “Fitting projects to people” in Cernea, M.M. (ed.) (1985) Putting people first: sociological variables in rural development. Oxford, UK : Oxford university Press. Pp. 369-378

Weerawattananont, W. (2003). Environmental education. 3 rd edition. Bangkok: odeon Store. [in Thai].

Wisitphanich, J. (2008). National forest park management manual. Bangkok: Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation. [in Thai].

White, S.A.(1994). The concept of participation: transforming rhetoric to reality, in White, S.A. et al (1994) Participatory communication: working for change and development. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications. p.18

Williamson, H.A. (1991). The Fogo Process: development support communication in Canada and the developing word” in Casmir, F.L. (1991) Communication in development. Norwood, New Jersey, USA: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Pp. 270-287.