Investigating Students’ Environmental Knowledge, Attitude, Practice and Communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the relationship between students’ knowledge, attitude and practice of the environment and effective communication of environmental messages. For this purpose, a knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) survey was conducted, involving 895 students from 16 higher learning institutions in Malaysia. The findings revealed that students in general, have a good level of environmental knowledge. However, knowledge does not necessarily lead to practice. There was a weak relationship between students’ level of knowledge and sustainable environment practices. Similarly, there was a weak relationship between students’ attitude and sustainable environment practices. Hence, attitude is not a good predictor for sustainable environment practices. These findings highlight the complexity of the relationship between students’ knowledge, attitude and sustainable environment practice. The findings of this study also suggested that, the internet is regarded as students preferred choice of media which can be utilised to disseminate environmental information. It is important, however, not to disregard the roles of more traditional media such as television and newspapers, as they can also be effectively used to deliver environmental information. Besides media, educational institutions and family also have crucial roles to disseminate environmental information and encourage good practice. Since many of the earlier studies of this nature have been conducted in at other places, particularly in the first world countries, this study is expected to contribute to the knowledge based on Malaysia’s own experience as a developing nation that aspire to champion sustainable environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".