Influence of Field Trips on Adolescent Environmental Stewardship: Examining the Role of the Dominant Social Paradigm

Abstract

Promoting environmental stewardship among youths is crucial for inspiring collaborative, multi-generational actions to tackle long-term environmental challenges. This research study explores the impact of an environmental education (EE) field trip, which highlighted wastewater management and renewable energy technology, on high school students using the revised new ecological paradigm (NEP) scale as a key metric in a pre-post survey, which uses traditionally pro (NEP) and anti (dominant social paradigm, DSP) conservationist statements to measure beliefs towards the environment. When applying the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (null hypothesis t = 0, no change) to the series of environmental stewardship action questions “___ is an extremely important part of protecting the environment”, we identified ten out of the thirteen scale questions to show significant change, all of which were positive. Additionally, the overall impact score was positive and significant (p ≤ 0.05). This finding demonstrates that respondents felt more strongly that these variables played a role in protecting the environment after experiencing the field trip. This suggests that exposure to environmental management intervention strategies utilizing man-made infrastructure and technology may enhance human capability to positively influence the environment and mitigate environmental threats, potentially alleviating concerns about environmental issues. These results suggest that environmental stewardship in youth needs to be reconceptualized in an increasingly STEM-focused world, and a new metric should be developed to assess environmental beliefs.

1. Introduction

Cultivating an understanding of environmental issues across diverse demographics has evolved into a shared responsibility within communities [1]. Specifically, fostering environmental stewardship in youth populations is essential for encouraging the multi-generational efforts required to address complex environmental issues facing the world today, such as climate change, habitat loss, pollution, and resource depletion issues [2]. Children tend to become more environmentally conscious between 7 and 10 years old [3]; however, this enthusiasm diminishes around the age of 14, during adolescence, as indicated by [4], with adolescents exhibiting decreased concern likely tied to the process of identity formation and heightened peer influence. By the time people reach adulthood, it becomes hard to change their strong beliefs and habits influenced by society and politics [5]. Specifically, societal norms and cultural conditioning (e.g., through education, media, and peer groups) reinforce certain beliefs over time, making them resistant to change [6]. Political influences, such as partisan messaging or policy-driven narratives, further entrench these beliefs by appealing to identity-based values [7,8]. For example, individuals often align their habits with prevailing political ideologies to maintain in-group belonging [9,10]. Yet, youth experiences can shape a person’s commitment to protecting the environment and acting against climate change throughout their life [11]. Teaching youths to foster empathy, acknowledging their role as agents of change, and instilling a conservation ethic in both natural environments and classrooms are essential components of environmental stewardship [12]. Nature-based outdoor education contributes to positive learning outcomes, fostering imaginative play, improving well-being, and instilling environmental stewardship [13]. Thus, youth engagement in environmental stewardship is crucial for addressing the pressing environmental issues.

The revised New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale has been widely used to measure various environmental attitudes, beliefs, and values [14]. The NEP scale was developed as a response to negative criticisms of the new environmental paradigm scale [15], and includes a series of traditionally pro- and anti-environmental conservationist statements. There are fifteen statements, including eight statements which, if agreed with, reflect an endorsement of the new environmental paradigm, an environmentally conscious worldview; and seven statements which, if agreed with, reflect an endorsement of the Dominant Social Paradigm (DSP), a human-centric worldview [14,16,17]. The NEP scale is a survey-based metric that has been used extensively in research to study various aspects of environmental attitudes and behaviors among different age groups, including children [14,18,19].

Environmental education (EE) field trips are structured, curriculum-aligned excursions designed to foster direct engagement with natural or socio-ecological systems, promoting experiential learning, pro-environmental attitudes, and critical thinking [20,21]. These trips often involve activities such as habitat observation, data collection, or discussions with local experts, bridging classroom theory with real-world contexts [22]. Environmental education field trips offer students an opportunity to venture outside the school environment for hands-on learning experiences [23]. Several studies have explored the effects of EE trips on children’s awareness and comprehension of environmentally friendly practices and renewable energy technology [24,25,26,27,28,29]. EE field trips have also been used as an experiential learning tool to influence youths’ attitudes and perceptions about Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education and careers [28]. To get more students interested in STEM subjects and careers, educators and policymakers are working to make STEM education exciting and engaging for students in elementary through high school [30,31]. A recent study in Spain by [32] measured the effects of a nature-based EE program on children’s environmental attitudes and behaviors using the NEP scale. Although their environmental behavior remained unchanged, children who were engaged in the EE program had increased pro-environmental attitudes more so than the control group. EE field trips and STEM interventions have the potential to reshape youth attitudes and behaviors and increase interest and participation in STEM into adulthood [33,34,35].

EE field trips provide students with direct experiences in real-world settings, exposing them to various aspects of the natural world, conservation efforts, and scientific research, thus fostering cognitive and emotional engagement with environmental issues [35,36]. These experiences offer unique opportunities to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application, making STEM subjects more tangible and relatable to students [33]. Furthermore, EE field trips have been recognized as effective tools for enhancing children’s understanding of complex concepts related to the environment and technology [28,35,37]. While the use of EE field trips has been studied, most of these field trips focus on immersion in nature to promote the preservation of the natural world. While this is an important aspect of fostering environmental stewardship, environmental management often requires direct intervention using manmade infrastructure and technology. Field trips aimed at providing exposure to human environmental impacts such as domestic waste and the need for energy can help underscore the human environmental footprint, which is often rendered invisible, especially in developed countries. While existing research has established the effectiveness of EE field trips in promoting environmental awareness [20,21,28,38], two critical limitations emerge. First, the predominant focus on natural ecosystems [22,32] has neglected the educational potential of human-managed environmental systems, particularly those demonstrating sustainable technology integration. Second, despite the well-documented decline in environmental engagement during adolescence [4], few studies have targeted high school populations with infrastructure-based EE interventions. This study aims to address two key research questions: How do field trips influence adolescents’ perceptions of environmental management actions? (ii) How valid are the NEP and DSP scales in assessing adolescents’ environmental beliefs? To answer these questions and fill existing gaps in the literature, the research investigates how exposure to a renewable energy-powered wastewater treatment facility impacts the environmental attitudes of high school students in New Jersey, as measured by the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale. Our research contributes to the field by expanding the scope of EE field trips to include critical human-altered environments, providing empirical evidence for interventions targeting the vulnerable adolescent demographic, and offering practical insights for developing EE programs that connect ecological principles with technological solutions [34].

2. Methodology

2.1. Site Selection and Field Trip

The Atlantic County Utilities Authority (ACUA) was originally established to provide a comprehensive wastewater management program in Atlantic County, NJ based on a need to restore degraded freshwater resources, estuaries, and marine environments [39]. ACUA constructed their Atlantic City, NJ-based Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility (RWTF) in 1978, which processes millions of gallons of wastewater generated in Atlantic County daily. In 2005, the ACUA’s RWTF became home to a 5-megawatt wind farm (5 turbines) known as the Jersey-Atlantic Wind Farm and a 500-kilowatt solar project (2700 panels); combined, these renewable energies power the entire facility with excess sold to the grid. Since its inception, the ACUA’s RWTF has proven vital to protecting the county’s environment and public health amidst residential and commercial development, as well as the increased strain placed by tourism [39]. The ACUA offers free tours and educational programming for visitors of all ages. High school students from the West Orange, NJ school district were contacted and invited to attend a field trip to visit the ACUA’s RWTF site under the supervision of their science teachers and the Montclair State University survey administrators. All participants (and their teacher) provided written informed consent before participating in the survey. The study adhered to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, implementing safeguards that included voluntary participation, complete anonymity, secure data handling, and the right to withdraw. The RWTF was chosen as the field trip site, as it acts as a one-stop facility for students to learn about wastewater treatment and renewable energy generation, namely solar and wind energy technologies. One science teacher expressed interest and sought permission from their school principal to bring their freshman (grade 9) students on the trip. The students received permission from their parents/guardians and their principal to attend the trip, which took place in April 2023. The ACUA provided a 1.5-h guided tour, followed by a question-and-answer session. During the trip, students visited various stations, including wastewater treatment ponds, a wind turbine location, solar panels, and the electronic controls of the wastewater treatment plant, as well as its use of renewable energy.

2.2. Survey Development and Administration

The pre-post surveys were developed to gauge the impact of the EE field trip on students’ responses to the NEP scale questions and level of agreement towards various factors’ (i.e., water conservation, renewable energy generation, etc.) importance for protecting the environment. Both surveys incorporated the validated NEP scale [14], utilizing a 5-point Likert scale to measure the degree of agreement or disagreement (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree), which has been widely used in environmental education research with adolescent populations [19]. The pre-field trip survey also included several questions regarding demographics (i.e., gender, ethnicity, etc.) and STEM education/career interests, following established protocols for youth-focused EE assessments [21].

Thirty-three high school freshmen participated in the field trip, with thirty-two completing both pre- and post-trip surveys (96.7% response rate). The relationship between group size and educational outcomes in environmental education remains an ongoing discussion in the literature. While some researchers suggest smaller groups may enhance learning [40], traditional classroom studies indicate optimal sizes around 15 students [41]. Our sample size (N = 33) is consistent with established environmental education field research, where logistical constraints often necessitate smaller groups while still yielding valid insights. Supporting precedents include [38], who compared attitudinal changes between subsamples (N = 31–38 and N = 17–19), and [42], who examined long-term impacts with 18 fourth-grade participants. These studies collectively demonstrate the methodological validity of samples below fifty in comparable field-based educational research. Of the thirty-two students (

Table 1. Socio-demographic information of respondents.

Category	Multiplicity (n)	Percentage (%)
Gender Male Female Other	16 14 1	51.6 45.2 3.2
Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino/a/x Non-Hispanic or Latino/a/x	7 24	22.6 77.4
Race White or Caucasian Black or African American Asian (multiple regions grouped) Other	8 9 9 5	25.8 29.0 29.0 16.2
Favorite school subject(s) STEM Non-STEM Both	24 4 3	77.4 12.9 9.7
Career/higher education interest STEM Non-STEM Undecided	25 2 4	80.6 6.5 12.9
Parent/guardian working in STEM field Neither One Both	7 16 8	22.6 51.6 25.8

), the majority identified as male (51.6%) and non-Hispanic or Latino/a/x (77.4%). The student group was relatively diverse with white (25.8%), black (29.0%), Asian (29.0%), and others (16.1%) represented. Additionally, the large majority stated their favorite school subject fell within the STEM category (77.4%), and 80.6% expressed an intention to pursue careers and/or higher education within the STEM fields. Further, the large majority reported that one (51.6%) or both (25.8%) of their parents/guardians work in the STEM field, a demographic profile consistent with urban STEM-focused EE studies [28].

The post-field trip survey also included two open-ended questions, inquiring about the most interesting things learned during the field trip and how the field trip impacted their feelings towards the environment, a design feature recommended for capturing nuanced attitude changes [23]. After the initial draft, the survey was revised to achieve a Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level score of 8.5 (equivalent to an 8th-grade reading level) and a Flesch Reading Ease score of 56.6 using Microsoft Word’s built-in readability tool [43], ensuring accessibility for high school students (Grade 7–9, recommended range: 50–70) as established in educational psychology literature [44,45]. As the RWTF was approximately a two-hour bus ride from their origin, the respondents were given ample time to complete the pre- and post-surveys while in transit. Administration during transit followed best practices for immediate post-experience data collection [46], with students completing surveys independently but being allowed to request clarification. After the full pre- and post-surveys were completed, they were collected by the survey administrator and were later coded for anonymity and further data analysis.

2.3. Data Analysis

The survey data was imported into JMP Pro statistics software (version 16.2.0) for statistical analysis [47]. After running the normality test (Shapiro–Wilk, *p* < 0.05) in the software, nonparametric tests were chosen for this study’s analysis due to the non-normal nature of the data (based on the goodness of fit test), which might be due to the small sample size in our study [48]. Further, a reliability test was run to measure the NEP scale’s consistency for both the pre- and post-field trip surveys. The change in score from the pre-survey to the post-survey was calculated for both the NEP questions and the impact on the environment questions, and the Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed on each factor testing the null hypothesis [49] that there was no change in response from the pre- to the post-survey.

$$W=\sum _{i=1}^{N_r}\left[sgn\left(x_{2, i}-x_{1, i}\right)\ast R_i\right]$$

where “W” is the test statistic, “$N_r$” is the sample size, “$x_{1,i}$” and “$x_{2,i}$” are the corresponding ranked pairs, and “$R_i$” represents the rank. This approach is well-documented for environmental attitude studies with similar designs [21]. Based on the results from these tests, we performed multivariate correlation analysis to identify any relationships between these significant variables, using Spearman’s “p” value to examine significance.

3. Results

The reliability test was run to measure the NEP scale’s consistency for both the pre- and post-field trip surveys. Both surveys failed the reliability test with Cronbach’s alpha value < 0.5; however, the NEP statements “Human ingenuity will insure that we do not make the Earth unlivable” and “Despite our special abilities, humans are still subject to the laws of nature” gave negative alpha values, suggesting these items alone were unreliable and that statements were perhaps confusing to the participants. When these two variables were excluded from this study, the reliability test yielded acceptable Cronbach’s α scores of 0.7213 (pre-survey) and 0.6135 (post-survey). When adapting the NEP scale for use with children, researchers often modify the statement language and exclude items from the scale depending on the children’s age group to improve comprehension and relevance to the population [19,50]. For this reason, these two statements were excluded from further analysis in this study.

When testing whether the change in response differed from the null hypothesis (t = 0, no change) from the pre-post surveys, we identified eight out of the thirteen NEP scale statements to show significant change (

Table 2. Test mean Wilcoxon signed-rank results for change in response pre-post survey, NEP scale statements.

NEP/DSP	NEP Scale Statement	Hypothesis	Signed-Rank	Mean
NEP	We are approaching the limit of the number of people the Earth can support.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.8589 0.1411	−0.0968
DSP	Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.3090 0.6910	0.0645
NEP	When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.1854 0.8146	0
DSP	Human ingenuity will insure that we do not make the Earth unlivable.	Excluded from this study
NEP	Humans are seriously abusing the environment.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.2735 0.7265	0
DSP	The Earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0017 * 0.9983	0.6452
NEP	Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.8924 0.1076	−0.3871
DSP	The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrial nations.	Prob > t Prob < t	<0.0001 * 1.000	2.2258
NEP	Despite our special abilities, humans are still subject to the laws of nature	Excluded from this study
DSP	The so-called “ecological crisis” facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0069 * 0.9931	0.4194
NEP	The Earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources.	Prob > t Prob < t	1.000 <0.0001 *	−1.7097
DSP	Humans were meant to rule over the rest of nature.	Prob > t Prob < t	<0.0001 * 1.000	1.4839
NEP	The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset.	Prob > t Prob < t	1.000 <0.0001 *	−1.7742
DSP	Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature works to be able to control it.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0003 * 0.9997	0.7097
NEP	If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe.	Prob > t Prob < t	0.9998 0.0002 *	−0.9677
	Overall change in NEP endorsement score	Prob > t Prob < t	1.0000 <0.0001 *	−4.9355
	Overall change in DSP endorsement score	Prob > t Prob < t	<0.0001 * 1.000	5.5484

Note: Where t = 0, indicating no change from pre- to post-survey; DSP refers to the Dominant Social Paradigm; NEP refers to the New Ecological Paradigm; * indicates a significance level of p ≤ 0.05.

). Five of these eight fell within the DSP statement category, each of these statements showed a positive trend, indicating that respondents agreed more with these statements in the post-survey after the field trip. The overall change in DSP statement endorsement score was positive and significant. The remaining three NEP statements showed a negative trend, indicating that respondents disagreed more with these statements in the post-survey after the field trip. The overall change in NEP statement endorsement score was negative and significant.

When applying the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (null hypothesis t = 0, no change) to the series of environmental stewardship action questions “______ is an extremely important part of protecting the environment”, we identified ten out of the thirteen scale questions to show significant change, all of which were positive. Additionally, the overall impact score was positive and significant (

Table 3. Test mean Wilcoxon signed-rank results for change in response pre-post survey, “______ is an extremely important part of protecting the environment”.

Impact Question	Signed-Rank	Signed-Rank	Mean
Water conservation	Prob > t Prob < t	0.1085 0.8915	0.1875
Proper wastewater treatment	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0154 * 0.9846	0.3125
Reducing landfill waste	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0082 * 0.9918	0.3125
Producing electricity from landfill gas	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0021 * 0.9979	0.4375
Composting	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0039 * 0.9961	0.40625
Invasive (non-native) plant and animal species management/removal	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0059 * 0.9941	0.3125
Planting native plant species	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0012 * 0.9988	0.53125
Supporting native animal species habitats	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0043 * 0.9957	0.3125
Recycling	Prob > t Prob < t	0.1382 0.8618	0.25
Generating electricity from renewable resources	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0475 * 0.9525	0.21875
Prioritizing renewable resources over fossil resources for electricity generation	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0085 * 0.9915	0.21875
Educating adult citizens (>18 years)	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0015 * 0.9985	0.375
Educating children citizens (<18 years)	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0896 0.9104	0.21875
Overall change in Impact score	Prob > t Prob < t	0.0038 * 0.9962	2.9355

Where t = 0 indicates no change from pre- to post-survey; * indicates a significance level of p ≤ 0.05.

). This finding demonstrates that respondents felt more strongly that these variables played a role in protecting the environment after the field trip experience. During the field trip, students were exposed to environmental management methods that capitalized on manmade equipment, facilities, and technology. They witnessed the beneficial effects of modern interventions on issues like wastewater treatment, renewable energy production, and closed-loop energy systems where on-site generation connects with the grid, providing a flexible and sustainable solution for fulfilling a facility’s energy requirements. The positive change toward environmental stewardship factors (Table 3) after the field trip could be associated with factors such as increased environmental awareness, knowledge, values, and priorities among others.

In a qualitative response to the question “What interesting thing did you learn today?”, the majority of the respondents mentioned that they learned about the process of water decontamination and wastewater treatment. One of the respondents was surprised to know that every individual in the United States uses 100 gallons of water per day. Some other responses recorded were:

“Waste does not go to the sewer but rather to the ocean, so it’s important not to flush medications; I learned how much energy is generated from single wind turbine; Water Treatment Plant deals with 29 million gallons of water/day; I learned the process of cleaning dirty water via Sodium Hypochlorite.”

The majority (67.74%) of survey respondents felt differently about the environment after the field trip; this finding was supported by qualitative responses. Some of the responses recorded were:

“I always felt strongly about conserving the planet, and the field trip reinforced my feelings; My views on the environment have not changed, but I have a greater appreciation for waste management and renewable energy; The field trip made me feel like I should respect the environment more because of how easily damaged it is; The field trip made me more conscious about where the trash I throw go and affect the environment; The field trip made me more aware about how potentially damaging our waste water could be if released untreated; The field trip gave me a better understanding of the environment’s fragility and urgency of giving it ample care.”

To further explore the dynamics between Impact statement score, NEP statement score, and DSP statement score, we performed a multivariate correlation analysis to see the relationship between the pre–post survey changes in responses (

Table 4. Correlations (r-value) between NEP scores, DSP scores, and impact scores.

	Impact Score	NEP Score	DSP Score
Impact Score	1.0000	−0.0252	−0.0550
NEP score	−0.0252	1.0000	−0.4654
DSP score	−0.0550	−0.4654	1.0000

). The scatterplot matrix revealed a moderate correlation (r = −0.4654) between changes in pre-post NEP and DSP scores, as overall NEP increased, DSP score decreased; Spearman’s $p$ value confirmed this relationship to be significant (p < 0.0001). While a bivariate fit analysis confirmed the trends showing that as post-survey NEP score increases, post-survey impact score decreases (r² = 0.0025, p = 0.7894) and as post-survey DSP score increases, post-survey impact score increases (r² = 0.076145, p = 0.1329), neither proved statistically significant. To draw any further conclusions on the correlation between values, a larger sample size is needed.

4. Discussion

Although the results suggest environmental stewardship does not necessarily align with the NEP ecological worldview, it is not entirely unexpected. A meta-analysis conducted by [21] revealed that 12 out of 86 environmental education programs showed no distinction between scores before and after participation in the environmental education program. Conventional field experiences linked to improvements in NEP scores often involve a high ecocentric orientation, immersing individuals in nature, such as nature hikes, where human activities are typically framed as intrusive and threatening to the environment [18,51]. The field trip discussed in this study highlighted the positive aspects of technology, portraying human intervention in a favorable light concerning its environmental impact. This is particularly important, given that adolescent disengagement in environmental education (EE) has been a persistent challenge, with interest typically declining by 19% during the high school years [52]. This technological framing addresses key gaps in conventional EE approaches. While nature-immersion programs reliably improve ecological knowledge and STEM field trips boost career interest, most of these programs focus solely on natural ecosystems [28], neglecting human-engineered systems that dominate students’ daily environments. Our wastewater plant visit uniquely bridges this divide by making infrastructure tangible, evidenced by 81.25% of qualitative responses referencing new thoughts about the environment after the field trip, 67.74% of respondents felt differently towards the environment after the field trip, and capturing DSP-NEP synergies, which are often missing in the literature. The significant post-trip increase in DSP score compared to the decrease in NEP score suggests that engineered environments resonate with youth by contextualizing sustainability within technological solutions.

The research findings indicate that participants showed a greater level of agreement with the DSP statements after the field trip. The inclination toward DSP could be due to the perception that technological advancement could mitigate environmental challenges regardless of their attitude being environmentally concerned [53]. A study among undergraduates found that a higher endorsement of DSP statements was directly aligned with the belief that “man can solve all problems with the help of science and technology,” a statement which sentiment is supported by this study’s findings [29]. Although the qualitative responses show an inclination towards the environment, the students’ exposure to the RWTF could have instilled in them the idea that human intervention and the application of technology can mitigate the environmental impacts observed thus far. For example, their visit to the wastewater treatment plants showcased the filtration and treatment of millions of gallons of wastewater each day, all while powered using renewable energy. Without this facility, the collection, filtration, and reuse of wastewater would not be possible, and without renewable energy technology, the facility would need to rely on electricity generated using fossil fuels, causing undue strain on the environment. Moreover, the direct sensory experience of seeing visibly and olfactorily putrid wastewater transform into clear and odorless water is highly likely to underscore the effectiveness of wastewater treatment technology.

While our study results show surprising findings, relative to the literature, where the field trip imposed stronger support for DSP statements and less support for NEP statements, the nature of the field trip (exposure to technology and pro-active environmental interventions) and the increased level of importance placed on certain environmental management actions reveal that the field trip was indeed successful in fostering environmental stewardship among adolescents. According to [54], knowing about the environment is part of being aware of it, and this knowledge boosts the motivation to actively participate in pro-environmental behaviors. Even brief tutorial programs in schools led to heightened levels of environmental stewardship among students ranging from elementary to college [18]. Between the ages of 9 and 14, individuals undergo swift advancements in higher levels of moral reasoning, emphasizing the significance of imparting environmental literacy and cultivating a bond with nature [55]. By centering on technology (e.g., a wastewater treatment facility powered by renewable sources) rather than abstract conservation, the trip resonated with youths’ preference for solution-oriented learning [56], as reflected in qualitative responses such as “I now see how tech can fix pollution.” This aligns with identity-based EE models showing that connecting environmental actions to students’ technological identities increases engagement [57]. Moreover, the absence of sufficient environmental education in schools hampers environmental stewardship [2].

Therefore, regular environmental field trips could play a crucial role in enhancing stewardship among young individuals. While the NEP scale is a valuable tool and recognized metric for measuring environmental beliefs, attitudes, and values across all ages, our study’s findings suggest that the ecological paradigm is not necessarily a good measure of environmental stewardship. [58] examined the reliability and dimensionality of the NEP scale among elementary and high school students, and found low consistency and multiple dimensions among the results, suggesting that the NEP scale should be used with caution as a measuring device for assessing environmental beliefs. In the presence of technology, innovation, and intervention-based environmental management among youth with STEM interests, the DSP (or human-centric worldview) provides a unique measure of environmental stewardship from a non-conservationist view. The perspective strengthened by the field trip can be described as techno-optimism, which emphasizes the role of technology in addressing environmental problems associated with waste generation and energy demand.

5. Conclusions

In this study, an EE field trip to a wastewater treatment facility powered by renewable energy exposed youths to practical demonstrations of, firstly, human environmental impact, and, secondly, and perhaps most importantly, the effectiveness of positive environmental management interventions. This study used the NEP scale statements to measure youths’ beliefs and attitudes towards the environment, before and after the field trip. Unsurprisingly, the DSP statements showed a stronger level of agreement, and the NEP statements showed stronger disagreement after the field trip, with the overall impact score being positive and significant (p ≤ 0.05). This finding is contrary to traditional environmental belief research; however, it is suspected that exposure to environmental management strategies that utilize manmade infrastructure and technology may highlight humankind’s ability to manipulate the environment in a positive way while removing the strain of environmental problems (i.e., wastewater management, energy security). This is confirmed by the respondent’s increased level of importance placed on certain environmental management techniques and practices (i.e., proper wastewater treatment, composting, and reducing landfill waste).

This study shows that exposure to modern environmental management techniques and technologies encourages the viewpoint that human intervention can more readily address these concerns as opposed to allowing nature to take its course. The findings of this study provide a compelling insight into the evolving perspective on environmental management. This type of exposure can foster a belief in the efficacy of human intervention in addressing environmental concerns instead of allowing nature to run its course. This could be valuable and inspiring for individuals who are interested in pursuing STEM careers. This study demonstrates how STEM professionals can make a meaningful impact on environmental issues through their work, emphasizing the relevance and importance of STEM fields. As such, this study points to the need to think about the NEP and DSP as potentially complementary rather than their dominant framing as non-dichotomous and mutually exclusive. This implies that a synergistic approach could be more effective in solving environmental challenges and fostering environmental stewardship in youth.

While our study addresses NEP and DSP insights, a larger and more diverse sample, namely age and geography, is crucial to understanding whether a new DSP-centric method should be considered for future work measuring environmental stewardship in youth populations. Specifically, we recommend developing validated instruments that capture both DSP and NEP dimensions of youth stewardship, expanding research to underrepresented populations and varied geographic contexts, and integrating qualitative methods (e.g., interviews, reflective journals) to complement quantitative measures. While our findings suggest a positive link between the field trip and stewardship attitudes, the absence of a control group prevents us from making definitive causal claims. Future studies using randomized or quasi-experimental designs could strengthen causal inference. This would enable us to draw more conclusive implications for environmental stewardship, capturing nuanced patterns and trends beyond the current scope. While in-transit survey administration provided temporal proximity to the experience, future studies could compare response quality across different survey settings. Despite these limitations, this study provides support for the positive impact of EE field trips on adolescents’ awareness of environmental challenges and their propensity to become environmental stewards. The results of this study could be used to promote a more engaging, relevant, and inclusive STEM education system by incorporating field trips in the academic curriculum as a means to encourage lifelong environmental stewardship and promote STEM-track higher education and careers which can lead to addressing environmental concerns as intellectuals and professionals.