BUILDING CONNECTIONS TO THE

ENVIRONMENT THROUGH PHOTOGRAPHY

Kari Post, May 2012

Antioch University New England

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
All materials are Kari Post and protected by law. These materials are designed to be an educational
resource and may be used for such purposes providing they are acredited to the author whenever used
in whole or in part. Photographs are Kari Post and may not be used out of the context of this
document without prior permission. For more information, including contact info, please visit Kari
Post Photography at www.karipost.com.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Abstract

II. Part One: Why Photography?

Introduction

Review of Existing Literature

Interviews

Selection Criteria

Methodology

Participating Practitioners

10

Interview Questions

12

Results and Themes

13

Critique of Study Design

28

Discussion and Recommendations

28

Citations

31

III. Part Two: Resources for Educators*

34

IV. Acknowledgements

34

*Part Two: Resources for Educators is available as a separate 31 page PDF document that may be
downloaded at www.karipost.com/educatorresources.
3

I. ABSTRACT
This project focuses on how participatory nature photography programs can be used to teach
young people about the environment. I divided the project into two delieverable components: the first
being findings from my research and the second being a resource for educators. To research this
project, I reviewed existing literature, including peer reviewed journal articles, books, films, websites,
and other literature, and also conducted in-depth informational interviews with experienced
practitioners. From these sources, I was able to explore some of the outcomes of participatory
photography programs and investigate whether they may be effective in fostering connections between
participants and the environment in terms of positive environmental attitudes, stewardship behaviors,
and environmental literacy and knowledge. These materials and conversations also helped me develop
a list of recommendations for environmental photography based educational programs, and this list,
along with activity ideas, and a comprehensive list of resources, including websites, organizations,
books, journal articles, and other media, for the second part of my project, designed to serve as a quick
reference resource for educators.

II. PART ONE: WHY PHOTOGRAPHY?

INTRODUCTION
I believe that teaching nature photography and environmental photojournalism can be an
effective method of engaging young people with the world around them and can serve as a valuable
tool for educating people about the environment and environmental issues. For my Master's project, I
examined how effective programs can be designed to accomplish the goal of connecting people with
nature and increasing their environmental knowledge and stewardship through photography. I reviewed
literature from peer-reviewed academic journal articles, public media, books, activity guides, and web
resources and also conducted informational interviews with experienced practitioners to learn more
about the design of existing programs, to identify the needs, best practices, and challenges of using
photography to connect youth with nature and educate youth about the environment, to develop a small
collection of lessons that can be used by enviro-photography educators, and to establish a list of
resources for centered youth photography programs and educators.
The focus of this project is on building the framework for a curriculum or program centered
around hands-on photography experiences in a natural setting, that emphasize building a connection
with nature, and cater to young adults (high school and college age). The final product, which includes
my research, suggestions for programs, sample activities, and a resource guide, will be made accessible
as a public resource, to help inform the design of such programs.

REVIEW OF EXISTING LITERATURE

In 2005, with the release of his book Last Child in the Woods, Richard Louv coined the term
nature-deficit disorder to describe what he saw as an increasing and chronic disconnection of
children from the natural world (Louv, 2008). The proof is blindingly apparent in the 335 pages of his
book, in anecdotal evidence across generations of Americans (Gardner, 2006), and in countless other
reports and studies. Louv is among a growing number of analysts who see unprecedented pattern
changes in how young people relate to nature and the outdoors, wrote Kevin J. Coyle, former
president of the National Environmental Education and Training Foundation, in his 2005 report on
Environmental Literacy in America (Coyle, 2005, p. #v).
Interestingly, this downward trend in time spent outside in nature corresponds with an upward
trend in time spent engaged in electronic media. In a 2006 study, it was found that a 16-year, 20%
decrease in visitation to national parks could be explained mostly (98%) by four variables: time spent
watching movies, surfing the Internet, and playing video games, and an increase in oil prices (Pergams
and Zaradic, 2006). Young people are increasingly consumed by electronic media; the average
American child spends between five and fifteen hours a day behind a screen (Schei and Merrill, 2010).
It is no wonder than, that children get 83% of their environmental information from the media,
more than any other source, and that the media is the only steady source of environmental information
for most adults. Yet only 1-2% of American adults can be considered environmentally literate with a
deep understanding of environmental knowledge and skills and hands-on experience with
environmental subjects (Coyle, 2005).
So why then, not use media as a way to reconnect young people with the natural world and
teach them about the environment? TV specials and films about wild animals, exotic places, and natural
history have been around for decades, as have environmentally focused journals and magazines, such
as National Geographic. Recent studies have shown that consumption of visual media can have a
6

significant impact on viewers, influencing their values, attitudes, and, to some extent, behavior, and can
even have significant pro-conservation effects (Blewitt, 2011). A growing body of academic research
exists to support these findings. As one example, a recent special issue of Environmental Education
Research (November 2011) was dedicated entirely to this arena and titled The media, animal
conservation and environmental education.
In the issue's editorial, Blewitt writes that, in addition to readily consuming media, children and
adults are enthusiastic producers of media as well. If hands-on experience is necessary for deep
understanding in order to build environmental literacy, consuming media can be an effective way to
impart environmental knowledge and encourage positive environmental attitudes, and creating media is
appealing, then it would make sense that participatory programs in which students are encouraged to
produce environmental media and/or produce media in and about a natural environment might also be a
way to build connections to the environment and natural world. Nature inspires creativity in a child by
demanding visualization and the full use of the senses, writes Louv in his landmark book (Last Child
in the Woods, 2008, p. #7). Why not harness that creativity and encourage it as a means of reconnecting
young people to the natural world that they are a part of?
Few studies have examined the connection between producing environmental media and
resulting environmental attitudes, behaviors, and knowledge. Yet, that which has been done is
promising. In a 2011 case study, it was found that making environmental videos with at risk high
school students may enhance their environmental literacy. The authors of the study found that
filmmaking is an inadequately researched environmental education pedagogy, but one with great
potential for developing environmental literacies (Harness and Drossman, 2011).
Photo Novella and Photovoice are two common techniques that have been used to empower
participants to explore and share stories about their environment through photography. They have been
most often used with under-privileged populations to document social issues and affect community
7

change (Hurworth et al., 2005). While there is a considerable amount of research to support these
strategies in the fields of social justice and public health (Clover, 2006; Hurworth et al., 2005; Purcell,
2009; Singhal et al., 2004; Wang and Burris, 1997), little exists in using these techniques to share
stories about nature or the natural environment. In one study, Photovoice was used to help participants
illustrate being active in nature (Drummond, 2010).
Filmmaking and photography provide opportunities for students to be present in nature, and
could potentially help young people interact more closely with their natural environment and encourage
learning about the natural world. The environment is, in many cases, visually interesting, and in nature,
form often follows function, so it is possible that by encouraging closer exploration of the natural world
through the camera lens, the process of photographing natural subjects may be an effective strategy for
environmental education. Given environmental photography's potential for connecting learners with
nature, the following section explores the use of existing participatory photography programs in
building connections between young people and the natural world.

INTERVIEWS
In order to get a better idea of what is currently being done in the field, I decided to interview
practitioners doing this type of work to learn more about their experiences. From these interviews I
hoped to learn about existing programs, including 1) how they have been designed and are being
implemented; 2) to identify best practices, challenges, and impacts; 3) to seek recommendations for
programs and learning activities; 4) to determine what the needs of educators in this field are; and 5) to
identify additional resources.

Selection Criteria:
I sought out individuals with hands on experience instructing photography, with a focus on
nature photography and photographing natural and environmental subjects in an outdoor, natural
setting, to youth between the ages of 12-22. Ideal candidates also had experience working with a
variety of types of programs and organizations and had at least several years of extensive hand-on
experience in the field. Instructional environment (formal or non-formal setting), non-age specific
student demographics (socioeconomic status, level of education, able-bodied, etc.), and duration of
program were not considered when selecting candidates, although ideally a variety of experiences were
represented among the individuals selected.

Methodology:
Individuals selected to be interviewed were asked via email if they would like to participate in
this project. The email briefly explained my project, the purpose of the interviews, and why the
individual was selected to participate. In the email, I state that interviews are expected to last
approximately one hour and will be recorded. Once individuals agreed to participate, I set up times to
interview them.
9

Of the ten email requests I sent to practitioners, eight were willing to participate in this project.
One individual declined due to being away on assignment, and the other did not respond to my email.
Due to scheduling conflicts and time constraints, I was only able to complete five interviews with six
practitioners: Karine Aigner, Deanna Del Vecchio, Stephen Dybas, Sophia LaCava-Bohanon, Keith
Snell, and Molly Steinwald.
Interviews took place in person, over the phone, or via Skype. I conducted all interviews and all
were recorded using a Zoom H2n digital recorder. Brief notes were taken during the interviews, mostly
to note times of responses to different questions. All interviews were done individually, one on one,
over the phone or Skype, with one exception; Stephen and Sophia represent the same organization and
were interviewed jointly in person. After the interviews were complete, I listened to the recorded
conversations and took details notes about the participant responses.
My findings were then reviewed and approved individually by the participating practitioners.
For each interviewee, I compiled a document that included any and all references to them or
organizations that they represent in the text below, along with their brief biographic introduction, so
that they could verify that I represented them and the organizations they represented fairly and
accurately. I also reiterated that they would be identified by name in my final paper, and offered to use
a pseudonym in place of their name if they preferred. None objected.

Participating Practitioners:
Karine Aigner Karine is the former senior photo editor of National Geographic Kids and National
Geographic Little Kids magazines, a position she held for nine years. She has assisted with the
National Geographic Photo Camp for kids from underserved communities throughout the world
and has also facilitated other collaborative youth photography projects. www.karineaigner.com
Deanna Del Vecchio Deanna is a co-founder and the executive director of Frame of Mind, an
10

organization that teaches youth about the environment through photography via immersive
workshop experiences. She has an Master's degree in Art Education and an undergraduate
degree in Environmental Studies and Biology, and ten years of experience running
environmental and arts-based community projects. www.frameofmind.org
Stephen Dybas Stephen is the Director of The In-Sight Photography Project based in Brattleboro,
Vermont. The non-profit provides photography classes to youth ages 11-18 regardless of their
ability to pay, with the goal of empowering young people and encouraging them to be actively
involved in their communities. He has been involved with In-Sight for four years and has also
taught collegiate level photography courses. www.insight-photography.org
Sophia LaCava-Bohanan Sophia is the assistant director for The In-Sight Photography Project as well
a photography based youth cultural exchange program, Exposures, designed to use photography
to facilitate a cross-cultural dialogue among diverse communities. She has four years of
experience with these programs. http://exposuresprogram.org/
Keith Snell Keith is the former committee chairperson of the North American Nature Photography
Association's College Scholarship Program, which provides selected undergraduate and
graduate students with the opportunity to meet, network, and photograph with professional
nature photographers at NANPA's annual summit. He spent four years with the College
Program, during which time he transitioned the student experience to a include a collaborative
conservation based photography project in partnership with local stakeholders. Keith also has
fifteen years of experience leading nature photography workshops for adults.
http://www.nanpa.org/scholarships.php
Molly Steinwald Molly is currently the director of science education at Phipps Conservatory and
Botanical Gardens in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, where nature photography classes are offered for
children ages 6-9 and is also integrated into a paid high school internship program designed for
11

urban underserved youth. She is a PhD candidate at Miami University whose dissertation is on
environmental connectedness and the effects of technology on nearby nature sensitivity. She has
experience running environmental photography based outreach programs for youth, including
under-privileged youth, focusing on nearby nature since 2009. www.mollysteinwald.com

Interview Questions:
The following questions were asked of each practitioner during their interview. The questions
cover three basic areas: 1) background and experiences, 2) program impacts, and 3) recommendations.

Can you share what your background is using photography to teach young people about the
environment?
Please describe for me the programs that you do. What do they typically look like?
What are the goals of these programs?
What about these programs do you find works really well? Educationally? Logistically?
What are some of the challenges you have run into with these programs?
What are the outcomes or results of these programs? For the participants?
Are there any other outcomes? (community based, outcomes unrelated to program goals)
How do these programs and/or experiences help students engage with nature, if at all?
How do these programs impact conservation or environmental issues, if at all?
What do you feel are the strengths and weaknesses are of using photography to engage kids
with nature?
As compared to other methods of building environmental awareness and knowledge?
What recommendations do you have for an environmental photography program? What
would an ideal program look like?
12

 Can you describe an activity you have done that you have found to be particularly effective?
What would be useful to you as an educator?
Do you have any resources that you would recommend to me or other enviro-photography
educators? This may include print resources, websites, organizations, contacts, activities,
sponsors, grants, etc.
Are there other people you feel that would be helpful for me to talk to?
Is there anything else you would like to share with me or think I should know?

Results and Themes:

The interviews provided valuable insight unattainable through previous research. During the
interviews, practitioners told me about the programs they had worked with and shared with me stories
about their experiences. They shared what they found worked well, as well as the challenges they have
encountered doing photography programs, and provided recommendations. They also provided
additional resources to me, including examples of activities they found to be particularly effective, and
in some cases additional contacts, information about organizations I had not yet heard of, and
suggestions for reading and further research.

Practitioner Experiences, Program Design, and Program Goals:

The practitioners had varied education and backgrounds, but all were relatively new to teaching
photography to youth. Most had between three and ten years of experience teaching photography to
youth, although some had more experience teaching youth or teaching photography. Their experiences
represented a variety of youth and nature photography related educational programs. These included
half-day photo workshops for young children, multi-day immersive project-oriented photojournalism
workshops with teenagers and young adults, first time photography experiences for under-privileged
13

youth, week plus long adult nature photography workshops, and regularly meeting after school and
school based programs. Programs occurred in urban, rural, and wilderness settings, sometimes local to
the participants and sometimes involving travel. Multiple practitioners had experience working in
multiple countries, sometimes with non-English speaking students with or without the aid of
translators.
While the programs varied greatly in duration and form, nearly all programs had high instructor
to participant ratios and/or small group sizes; one instructor per four to five students was common, and
20 participants was the maximum group size in any of the programs. Some programs used point-andshoot digital cameras, some used film cameras, and some used film or digital SLR cameras. In nearly
every program, with the exception of the two programs Keith was involved with, the NANPA College
Scholarship program and his adult photography workshops, both of which are designed for existing
photographers, cameras and other equipment were provided to the participants. In every case where
equipment was provided, the students coming to the workshops may have been assumed to not yet be
photographers or photo hobbyists.
Programs often consisted of some classroom based lessons followed by hands-on time taking
pictures outdoors. Several programs also combined writing and/or messaging with photography. In the
most programs students, at minimum, write captions for their work. Sometimes students journal or
interview people, and in some cases the end product is a photo-essay or multimedia project or film.
In most programs, particularly the longer duration ones, editing in some form was included as a
part of the photography and learning process. Usually, with younger participants (teenage and younger)
editing was done in small groups, led by a photography instructor or facilitator; older students
sometimes edited their images independently. In programs where participants were not a part of the
editing process, it was most often due to time constraints, such as with the designing of a photo essay
book for Haitian participants in a Frame of Mind Workshop. Molly Steinwald, who, of the practitioners
14

interviewed, had the most experience doing photography workshops with very young students,
suggested that for very young children, it was more important for them to be outside, actively engaging
with nature. She said that research indicates children have too much screen time and not enough time
outdoors, and therefore felt that it was important to deemphasize the technology, the technical
components, and post processing aspects of photography, particularly with very young children.
The goals of each program varied, although there was considerable overlap between some
programs and common themes did emerge. Molly said that the goal of the photography programs at
Phipps Botanical Gardens and Conservatory, where she works, is to heighten [the participants]
sensitivity to nature in their everyday life by getting them to notice nature, then learn about it in the
context of their lives, with the hope of fostering care for it. The emphasis is not about becoming a good
photographer, but about being aware of their environment and how it relates to their lives, she said.
Throughout all the programs she has run, across the age groups, the emphasis is on learning how to
see, not necessarily creating a perfectly composed picture.
For many programs, this increased awareness of the environment in which they lived or were
present, was a popular goal. A common theme among the various programs was instilling participants
with a sense of place and teaching them specifically about the environment that they live in. In the
National Geographic Photo Camps, learning is often centered around a theme that encourages students
to notice the environment they live in. For Frame of Mind workshops, The goal of the program is to
encourage young people to use photography to express their opinions about what's going on in their
communities and their natural environments, said co-founder Deanna Del Vecchio. I use photography
as a way to get young people to think critically about the world around them.
The In-Sight Photography Project similarly strives to engage students with their communities.
The In-Sight Photography Project offers students a creative voice and outlet, an opportunity to
experience success, tools for self-awareness and self-worth, and encourages them to become actively
15

engaged in their communities, reads the organizations mission statement. Executive director Stephen
Dybas and assistant director Sophia LaCava-Bohanan emphasized that In-Sight placed the needs of
each student first and that goals for each student were often highly individualized. In-Sight strives to be
nimble enough to meet each youth where they are, said Sophia.
Empowerment was a common theme among all of the programs. This ranged from helping
students to feel good about themselves to making them feel capable of making a difference in the
world. I think its important for students to experience success, said Sophia. It's more significant to
the organization that youth have opportunities to experience success than for us to define what success
is for them, she added.
Many of the students who apply for and are accepted into NANPA's College Program write in
their application essays that some day they want to contribute to conservation and make a difference,
said former program chair Keith Snell. They don't see themselves as being able to do that right now, he
said, and just shifting that perception is hugely important.
One of my goals with the college program was to illustrate that you can get a lot more done
through collaboration than you can through competition, said Keith. The design of the college
program draws together talented young photographers from around the world to collectively research
and document a conservation or environmental issue. At the end of every these projects, there is
significant recognition by the participants that they never could have accomplished what they did on
their own. They never could have gotten that much done, made that much of an impact, in that short of
a time, he said. For the college program's collaborative photo projects on environmental issues, a
project model he helped design, the goal was to make a difference and provide a learning opportunity.
Additionally, its design enables participants to feel success and promotes working together to reach a
common goal.
Improvement of participant photography skills was another program goal commonly expressed
16

by the practitioners, although none of them indicated that it was their individual top priority as an
educator. For photographers participating in workshops, such as those offered by Keith to adult
participants, skill improvement may be one of the main reasons that people come to such workshops,
but even then Keith felt that connecting participants to nature was a vital part of the process and
necessary for helping participants get the best images.

Do participatory photography programs help connect people with nature?

When I asked practitioners, How do these programs and experiences helped students engage
with nature, if at all? the response was strong.
If you are photographing nature, you have to engage with it, and you also have to learn how to
not scare it off, so you have to learn how to behave in nature, said Karine. There is no 'if at all', it's
100%. If you are photographing nature you have to engage with nature, you have to give it respect, you
have to treat it lightly.
For me [nature photography] has helped me shape my world view and my value system, so I
recognized that that could be used as a tool to guide other people along their journey in life, said
Keith. Photography encouraged him discover and explore, and find appreciation for things he might not
otherwise have noticed, and when teaching photography, he encourages his students to do the same.
The process of being out in nature helps them engage with nature, he said.
Deanna felt similarly about the youth programs she ran in Toronto and Haiti.
At In-Sight, where the goal of the program is not expressly nature oriented, the directors felt the
act of photography encouraged exploration in nature. We're not solely focused on nature, but I think
it's something we couldn't avoid if we tried. It's the world our kids live in and something that they
really enjoy, said Stephen. Our kids default to documenting their environment, he said. Sophia
added that photography gives the students a reason to go outside.
17

It was clear that practitioners felt deeply connected to the work they were doing and found
unique value in using photography as an educational tool.
Most people can be convinced that they can learn to become a good photographer, said Keith.
Many said that photography helps students to see and experience nature in a way that they
hadn't before. When approaching a problem or issue from an artistic standpoint it gets your brain
working in a different way, said Deanna.
Keith told me one story about a college program when he and the other mentors brought
students to what looked like a desolate desert landscape. Throughout the day, the students began to
discover the richness of the area by seeking things to photograph. They started looking much more
deeply than they would have if they were just passing through, he said.
For a homework assignment for one of the National Geographic Photo Camps, students were
told to photograph something that meant something to them. One girl came in with a photo of her
window. She said she had looked out that window every day of her life but had never really noticed
what was outside it before, said Karine, but now she had noticed there was a tree and bushes.
At the end of a Frame of Mind workshop in Haiti, students were asked to share a bit of what
they learned. On a whiteboard were written the words Photography inspired me to ... and students
were left to fill in the blanks. Their responses were overwhelming positive and often had powerful
connections to the environment. You can just tell from talking to them that they won't forget the stuff
that they learned, said Deanna. See their full set of responses at:
http://frameofmind.photoshelter.com/gallery/Photography-inspired-me-to/G0000ulu69WEWt6k/C0000Py0OWXalbXE

Despite this promise, Molly had a word of warning. I think [photography] has its place; I don't
think that it replaces a lot of the other nature education that is out there, she said. While she shared a
number of stories about how she has successfully used photography to connect people to nature, she
did not feel that photography was critical for doing so. Where Molly did think photography was helpful
18

in terms of building connections to nature was by roping in today's youth that are so connected to
technology. Photography can be a way to reconnect kids to nature through technology, she said.
Most of the practitioners felt that there is not enough research in this area specifically how
hands-on photography programs impact young people's experiences of, connection to, and knowledge
about nature. They suggested that there is little to no research currently out there, and felt that scientific
research and formal assessment of existing programs could help inform the design of current and future
programs, and also help programs seeking funding to obtain grants. In particular, some questioned the
impact of programs, and cited the lack of research done to determine if programs are effective,
particularly when I asked about program outcomes. Program effectiveness, whether or not the
programs accomplished their goals, whether programs had the effect of influencing participants
perceptions of and knowledge about the natural world and their environment (regardless of if this was
intended or not), and whether any of these impacts had a long term, lasting effect is, for the most part,
unknown and unstudied.
So much of this stuff is anecdotal, said Karine, referring to lack of scientific evidence that
participatory photography programs are effective models for building connections to nature and
teaching about the environment. She described the results, particularly the emotional connections and
affinities that the practitioners describe as the outcomes of such programs, as a touchy feely thing
and complicated to quantify.
I've seen that kids are getting really excited about stuff, I see that they're now touching nature
and getting excited about all of this nature that they've never [experienced] before, said Molly, but
then to have a long term impact a week or month, five months or ten years down the road, I don't
know. Molly, a PhD candidate, is eager to contribute to academic knowledge on the subject. So little
has been done on any of this, she said, I so want to do more.
Most of the practitioners felt that participatory photography programs did have numerous
19

benefits to participants, including that of connecting them to nature, regardless of the lack of research
to support this. They also said that the effect of programs on participants varies greatly from individual
to individual. Many of the practitioners reported that they hear from former students who say what a
positive impact the programs have had on their lives. Molly and Karine have received emails from
former students, In-Sight students who have outgrown the program come back to teach classes as
volunteers, and former scholarship students from the North American Nature Photography
Association's (NANPA) College Program have continued on in NANPA as committee members in
NANPA's environment and college program committees.
Part of the problem is environmental attitudes and values change over time, and no long range
studies or assessments have been done to determine the impact that these programs have decades later.
Because we work a lot with younger kids I don't know in the long run if they are going to be an
environmentalist or a conservationist, said Molly. She questions the impact of short-duration
programs. I don't think in the short term it probably does much, [but] I think there's a real promise
with longer term photography engagement to grow kids that will become environmentally committed.

Discussion of Challenges and Programming Advice from the Experts:

Over the course of my conversations with the practitioners, several themes arose about what
they felt made for a good photography program. All practitioners felt that greater contact time
increased the likelihood that the program would be effective, and most suggested that higher quality
programs were longer in duration and provided multiple opportunities for follow up instruction. The
programs the practitioners had experience in facilitating took on various forms ranging from one time
workshops lasting just a couple of hours to fully immersive experiences lasting up to ten days long.
There were also programs that recurrently met for shorter periods of time over the course of several
weeks or a semester, and in some cases students reenrolled in such programs and stayed involved for
20

several years.
I think time is critical. You have to give people time to get a sense of place. They have to feel it
emotionally. Without feeling that sense of place, without spending time there, you are not going to get
the effect you need, said Keith. You can't do it in a couple hours.
Molly equated the quality of the program with how long it lasted, saying that educational
research regularly shows that programs that provided multiple contact points with participants regularly
have the most impact. She described a probable low impact program as working with one set of kids
for a couple of hours, medium impact lasting a couple days, and a high impact program being at least
one week long, although she said getting a whole semester with participants would be even better.
She doesn't discount shorter programs though. In 2011, she, Karine, and another photographer
led a short workshop with 5-11 year olds at Quinta Mazatlan in McAllen, Texas as part of the NANPA
summit. They focused the activity on plants and talked about lines, patterns, colors, and how there was
beauty all around; they then related scientists to artists, showing how scientists will note the same
attributes as the artists, but will then ask the further question of why the attribute is as it is. Some of
the pictures were amazing, better than a lot of professional photographers, said Molly. It's very neat
that in such a short exercise you can actually get somebody to notice these components of nature.
Additionally, several practitioners emphasized the importance of unstructured down time during
programs.
Believe it or not one of the most effective times I have during my photography workshops is
lunch time, he said. Lunch gives participants time to sit, relax, and be present in the experience of
being out in nature, without the distraction of the camera. In the end, this connection with the
environment helps his participants take better pictures, and this connection is also vital for helping
establish a value for nature. You don't really value something just because you understand it from a
factual standpoint, argues Keith; it's impossible to change a value system through logic. You have to
21

experience [nature] in order to establish that value, he said. Your value system has to change through
emotions.
This argument is supported somewhat by a 2011 study comparing reactions and attitudes
between participants watching highly emotive visual media vs highly factual visual media. The study
found that watching an emotionally charged environmental film corresponded with the greatest
increase in environmental attitudes, and that maximum effectiveness was gained when emotions and
facts were presented together. (Pearson et al, 2011)
When I first started teaching photography I thought it was all about teaching photography
skills, but through the years I've evolved to understand that its more about the experience. The
experience is just as important, if not more important, than teaching the techniques, he said.
Deanna also felt an important part of the programs she has done is just getting kids into nature,
and once they got there, giving them time to explore and just be. She cited Richard Louv's Last Child
in the Woods (Louv, 2008) as proof that unstructured time in natural environments is valuable to young
people, and said that when programs have a narrow focus on taking pictures, the camera can sometimes
get in the way of the experience. Ideally you encourage [the students] to set down the camera from
time to time, she said.
Molly said that for her programs, Photography is not really the focus, its a means to an end.
Instead the camera is a tool that participants can use to see the world around them. Have it be about
nature, she said, The camera is just a window that you are stepping through to get there. She said
that for younger students in particular, just getting them out in the dirt and reducing their screen time is
most important.
One way Molly likes to encourage students to interact with their environment is by limiting the
number of photos they can take. Allow at most 20 photos in a one hour time period, she said, and limit
them to a small area (e.g. a city block or a school yard). This challenges them to really explore and
22

interact with what they find.

Keith also encouraged the use of a small photography area. He finds that when he takes students
to a smaller area with less subject matter, the students typically take better images. It forces them to
slow down, to pay more attention, and to not just photograph the obvious. I try to get them off the
beaten path and encourage them to take photographs that are more insightful, he said.
Simplicity was not limited to just the environments in which the students worked, but it was
often encouraged throughout the programs, particularly those geared towards younger students and
non-photographers. The simpler it is, the easier it is for someone to wrap their mind around what they
have to do, said Deanna.
A number of the programs use basic digital point-and-shoot cameras, and Deanna has even done
activities with disposable 35mm cameras. The photographs in the book We, Sea, a compilation of the
work done by children in Eleuthera, Bahamas, was done entirely with disposable underwater cameras
(Galvin, 2007). Particularly for shorter programs and programs for very young children, complete
beginners, and under-privileged youth who may not have access to cameras in their everyday lives,
more basic cameras have a number of advantages that make them ideal, including a relatively gentle
learning curve, lower equipment costs, and ease of use. Sometimes the technology can be intimidating
and you don't want that to be a limiting factor, said Deanna. By keeping the costs down and the
cameras, concepts, and instruction basic, photography often becomes more accessible to these
populations.
Many of the photography organizations focused on working with under-privileged youth, often
from urban environments, and in some cases from developing countries with a significant lack of
infrastructure and resources. This raises some unique concerns.
One is lack of access to technology. In poorer urban areas, students may not have the ability to
borrow or own a camera outside of the workshop itself, and may not have access to a computer. In
23

these situations, how does photography become a helpful learning experience? Molly questioned: What
happens when you go into a poor community, teach them how to use fancy cameras, and then leave and
have no contact with them again? Now they no longer have a camera or access to one. Do they feel
worse? If participants are not left with the skills to get themselves out of the situation they are in, then
has the program helped them, or hurt them?
Walking in and walking out is counterproductive, said Karine. What difference does it make
to them once you leave and they don't have the tools to do that with any more? Do the kids have the
tools have the tools after the program to be able to continue doing this? And if not, what kind of an
affect is that going to have on a group you walk into and out of.
They have to be able to have the tools or the people or the network to come back to so that
whatever experience they had in their workshop they are able to continue with, she said. You have to
be really careful because hope is a funny thing. You can give it and then take it away, and if you do that
I think that is more devastating than that kid never having known it. Follow up, it seems, is then vital
to the success of these programs.
In many areas, urban kids still have cell phones even if they have little else. Molly plans to
begin using cell phone photography teaching, and is considering teaching photography only with cell
phones in most activities, as a way to further help participants understand that nature is all around them
and that they do not need a fancy camera to find it.
Access to electricity can also be a problem in developing countries. This presents difficulties for
photography programs themselves in terms of charging camera batteries and computers, presenting the
students work, and making the products of the workshop available to the public. It also leaves the
question of what happens when the workshop is over, and how to follow up with these students.
In Haiti, Frame of Mind partnered with Panos Carribean, a locally based non-profit that teaches
journalism skills and educates students about climate change. Panos was able to buy cameras for
24

students to use after the workshop, and also has a facility that can be used as classroom space with a
generator for power. For Frame of Mind, the goal is to seek out grants that would allow cameras to be
purchased and left on site after the hands-on workshops, so that students would have a way to continue
their work.
Another concern for urban and under-privileged students is the perception that they lack access
to nature. This phenomenon is actually not unique to suburban and urban areas, and educators working
in all environments should be careful to build connections between the students experiences as part of a
photography program and their everyday life. Even in the small city of Brattleboro, Vermont nestled in
a rural New England landscape, complete with local parks, agriculture, and the Connecticut River,
access to the natural world can sometimes seem limiting. Kids think they have to go somewhere to
access nature, explained Stephen, adding that You have to be careful how you define environment; for
so many people the perception is that it's way out in the woods.
A number of the programs brought students from their own backyards to somewhere else kids
from Los Angeles to the Santa Monica Mountains or from the city of Jacmel, Haiti to Parc La Visite
National Park. In a 2001 Canadian study, it was found that students brought to a wilderness area for a
12-day wilderness immersion program had difficulty connecting their trip experiences to life back
home; for them nature was out there and could not exist where they did (Haluza-DeLay, 2001). For
environmental photography educators wishing to use photography as a way to build connections to the
environment, an outcome such as this would be counterproductive. Sophia recommended talking about
the environment in terms of appreciating what is readily accessible to avoid this.
For Molly, this is one of the cornerstones of her teaching. Based in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania her
photography teaching focuses on educating young people about nature in the city and the built
environment.
Additionally, photography programs that connect students with the world they live in should not
25

be limited to cities. Kids living in affluent areas and rural areas should also have access to such
programs. As far as I know In-Sight is one of the few organizations like itself that exists in rural
areas, said Stephen.
Practitioners also emphasized the importance of showing off student work and of providing
students with something to take home. Students should also always be provided with something they
can take home, to keep and to show to others. Molly always keeps extra CD-Roms available to burn the
student's images to. Many organizations provide students with prints or digital copies of their work.
Karine emphasized that the take home product should be something the students can use and access.
For example, it would be inappropriate to give a CD-Rom to a student in Africa living in a mud hut.
It is also important to show off student work. Photo projects are often put on public display or at
minimum presented to a group. The whole process of learning, seeing, making pictures, and then
displaying their imagery to see the power of what they've done [brings it] full circle, said Karine.
When you show it to an audience, that's full circle. That shows you the power of what you have
created.
Deanna says having a plan for disseminating information is important, be it an exhibit, a book, a
blog, or something else. Displaying the work makes students proud of what they've accomplished. She
typically lets teenage students choose what they want the end product to be, with some guidance of
course. This gives students a sense of ownership over the final product, and helps them become
invested in the program.
Keith, who works with college students, believes strongly in getting students to buy into the
college program's conservation photography projects. They have to have ownership over the process,
he said. If you are not successful in doing that you won't succeed. Try to guide students through the
process and leave the decision making up to the students, he suggested. The challenge for the facilitator
is stepping back.
26

Showing off the work is also a vital part of connecting with the greater community and sharing
the environmental stories the students have been exploring. Photography is a storytelling tool that is
visual, explained Karine. When you use photography to show people what they don't know or what
they haven't seen before, it allows them to be able to make better decisions. If these workshops are used
to show a greater audience a message, then they do have an impact.
Deanna says these opportunities also give students a change to learn about the issues from a
scientific and social perspective, which increases their level of knowledge.
Additionally, practitioners emphasized the need to be willing to be flexible and adaptive.
I do a lot of winging it, said Karine.
Be super super flexible, said Molly.
And photography education doesn't just have to be for photographers. It doesn't have to be just
a photography program; it can be a component, said Deanna. I think its a really valuable component
because it provides amazing documentation. For example, at Phipps, photography has made up about
15 percent of the high school internship program they offer (this will increase to 25 percent in 2012);
students also participate in urban gardening, learn about conservation, sustainability, and horticulture
trhough a broad range of participatory activities, and meet with local scientists. At the end of the
internship, participants images are displayed in the art gallery at the botanical garden and also used in
educational and marketing materials, giving the photographers credit each time, and thereby giving
their photographic work professional credibility.
Using photography can be a part of any conservation program, said Deanna. There are a lot
of environmental education programs out there and I think all of them could benefit in using
photography in some way.

27

Critique of Study Design:

While I attempted to reach out to environmental photography educators of varied backgrounds
and with different experiences and organizational affiliations, several prominent organizations were not
represented by those interviewed, including Kids With Cameras, Parks in Focus, National Geographic
Student Expeditions, Digital Photography Bridge to Nature, Literacy Through Photography, and the
North American Nature Photography Association High School Scholarship Program.
There was also a fair degree of overlap in the experiences of these participants. In some cases,
participants knew each other or had worked together. Many of the participants were also relatively new
to using photography as an educational tool with young people; none of the participating practitioners
had more than ten years of experience in this field.
It should be noted that these interviews were not structured as part of a rigorous scientific study,
but that should in no way invalidate the experiences and knowledge of the participating practitioners.

Discussion and Recommendations:

Photography as a tool for engaging youth people with and educating them about the
environment is grossly understudied. While there are a number of individuals and organizations doing
this work, very little has been done to quantify if these programs are effective, and if they indeed are,
how much so. Anecdotal evidence from these practitioners suggests that photography as a means of
environmental education does have some merits, but, as they have suggested, much more research
needs to be done in this area to determine the effectiveness of these programs. How do these programs
affect participants? Do these programs increase environmental awareness and stewardship? Do they
promote positive environmental attitudes? What are the short term effects? The long term ones?
How do these programs affect marginalized youth, in particular? Since many of the
organizations are specific to youth from under-privileged and under-served communities, we need to
28

examine what impact these programs have, not only on nature and environment centric factors such as
environmental attitudes, awareness, knowledge, and stewardship, but also on youth self-esteem and
empowerment. Does providing under-served youth with technology absent from their everyday lives
give them experience with tools they need to success, or instead enlighten them to all that they don't
have access to, giving them hope and then pulling it out from under them? It would also be good to
assess the impact that technology based programs have on participants that lack access to such
technology in their every day lives, and to determine which methods of follow up, if any, maximize
results.
Also what factors affect how effective these programs are? In particular, I would like to see a
study that compares short-duration workshops with longer-term programs. I would also like to see a
study comparing a shorter-duration immersive workshops (ex: all day every day for one week) to
extended, longer-term programs that meet regularly, but for a shorter amount of time each session (ex:
a few hours a day, once a week, for an entire semester).
These of course, are just a few of the many countless questions that could be explored on this
topic. With so little research, virtually no question has a scientifically proven answer.
However, I think it should be emphasized that just because there is not a significant body of
research to prove the effectiveness and impacts of these programs, does not mean that they are not a
valid environmental education strategy. The anecdotal evidence from these interviews shows that for at
least some individuals, these programs can contribute to positive feelings of self-worth and encourage
individuals to notice new details about their environment.
Beyond research, I also asked practitioners what would be useful to them, as educators.
Unanimous among nearly all of them was the request for educational materials. Several suggested a
collaborative platform in which educators could share resources and project and activity ideas, others
suggested an activity book or manual, and many liked the idea of a website or blog, possibly with
29

forums for sharing ideas and experiences, sample lessons, example photographs for activities, and
additional resources.

30

CITATIONS:
Aigner, K. (2012, April 5). Voice Skype interview.
Blewitt, J. (2011). The media, animal conservation and environmental education. Environmental
Education Research. 17(6), 711-718.
Briski, Z., R. Kaufmann, J. McDowell, and N. Baker. (2005). Born into Brothels. DVD. New York:
HBO/Cinemax Documentary Films.
Clover, D. (2006). Out of the dark room: Participatory photography as a critical, imaginative, and
public aesthetic practice of transformative education. Journal of Transformative Education. 4(3),
275-290.
Coyle, K. (2005). Environmental literacy in America: What 10 years of NEETF/Roper Research and
related studies say about environmental literacy in the U.S. Washington, D.C.: National
Environmental Education and Training Foundation.
Del Vecchio, D. (2012, April 2). Voice Skype interview.
Dragan, P.B. (2008). Kids, Cameras, and the Curriculum: Focusing on Learning in the Primary
Grades. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Drummond, J. (2010). Footprints: Engaging youth to be physically active in nature through Photovoice.
University of Victoria.
Dybas, S. and S. LaCava-Bohanon. (2012, March 30). Personal interview.
Ewald, W.. (2012, April 10). Personal conversation.
Ewald, W. and A. Lightfoot. (2001). I Wanna Take Me a Picture: Teaching Photography and Writing to
Children. Boston: Beacon.
Farnsworth, B.E. (2011). Conservation photography as environmental education: focus on the
pedagogues. Environmental Education Research. 17(6), 769-787.
Galvin, J. (2007). We, Sea: Photographs and Words from the Children of South Eleuthera. New York:
31

Fastback Creative Books.

Gardner, M. (2006, June 29). For more children, less time for outdoor play: Busy schedules, less open
space, more safety fears, and the lure of the web keep kids inside. The Christian Science Monitor.
Boston. June 29, 2006.
Haluza-DeLay, R. (2001). Nothing here to care about: Participant constructions of nature following a
12-day wilderness program. Journal of Environmental Education. 32(4), 4348.
Harness, H., and H. Drossman. (2011). The environmental education through filmmaking project.
Environmental Education Research. 17(6), 829-849.
Hurworth, R., E. Clark, J. Martin, and S. Thomsen. (2005). The use of photo-interviewing: three
examples from health evaluation and research. Evaluation Journal of Australia. 4(1&2), 52-62.
Louv, R. (2008). Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Chapel
Hill, N.C.: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
Neumann-Hinds, C. (2007). Picture Science: Using Digital Photography to Teach Young Children. St.
Paul, NM: Redleaf Press.
Osborne, N.. (2012, April 4). Personal conversation.
Pearson, E., J. Dorrian, and C. Litchfield. (2011). Harnessing visual media in environmental education:
increasing knowledge of orangutan conservation issues and facilitating sustainable behavior
through video presentations. Environmental Education Research. 17(6), 751-767.
Pergams, O.R.W. and P.A. Zaradic. (2006). Is love of nature in the U.S. Becoming love of electronic
media? 16-year downward trend in national park visits explained by watching movies, playing
video games, internet use, and oil prices. Journal of Environmental Management. 80, 387-393.
Purcell, R. (2009). Images for change: Community development, community arts, and photography.
Community Development Journal. 44(1), 111-122.
Schei, T.H., and M. Merrill. (2010). Play Again. DVD. Portland: Ground Productions.
32

Singhal, A., L.M. Harter, K. Chitnis, and D. Sharma. (2004). Shooting Back: Participatory Photography
in Entertainment-Education. Ohio University.
Snell, K. (2012, March 29). Telephone interview.
Steinwald, M. (2012, April 5). Telephone interview.
Varriale, J. (1999). Take a Look Around: Photography Activities for Young People. Brookfield, CT: The
Millbook Press.
Wang, C. and M.A. Burris. (1997). Photovoice: concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs
assessment. Health Education and Behavior. 24(3), 369-387.

33

III. PART TWO: RESOURCES FOR EDUCATORS

Part Two: Resources for Educators is available as a separate 32 page PDF document. It may be
downloaded at http://www.karipost.com/blog/masters-project/.

IV. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project would not have been possible without the support, participation, and
encouragement of many individuals. In particular, I would like to thank my academic and project
advisor, Dr. Elizabeth McCann of Antioch University New England for her guidance and critical
assessment of this project, AUNE's Joy Ackerman for assisting with the IRB process, and Karine
Aigner, Deanna Del Vecchio, Stephen Dybas, Sophia LaCava-Bohanan, Keith Snell, and Molly
Steinwald for taking the time to be interviewed for this project and their willingness to share their
experiences and expertise.
Additionally my peers and colleagues have been amazingly supportive of my work. Special
thanks must go to Molly Smryl, Tony Krutiak, and Molly Mehling for their support and Wendy Ewald
and Neil Osborne for being open to participating in this project, although circumstances prevented it.
And finally, a very special thanks you goes to my mom, Ruth Post, for financially and emotionally
being the backbone of this venture and my very existence.
This project would not have been possible in its current form without your help. Thank you very
much, each and every one of you, along with all of the others I have not explicitly mentioned, for your
contributions.

34