Water quality bioindicator programs as an educational tool: Measuring effectiveness with a university student questionnaire

Abstract

The educational effects of water quality bioindicator programs were investigated using questionnaires administered to students at seven universities. Approximately 10–20 ％ of the students participated in the bioindicator program before they entered university. In the present curriculum prescribed by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, bioindicators are usually covered in junior high school science textbooks. In the previous curriculum (priori to 2011), they were often covered in senior high school basic biology textbooks. Although bioindicators are rarely covered in elementary school science textbooks, 70–80 ％ of students who participated in the bioindicator program learned about bioindicators in elementary school. Thus, additional materials provided by local governments were expected to be used as the primary texts on bioindicators at the elementary school level. A small proportion of students who participated in the bioindicator program learned the scientific basis of water quality through the bioindicator program: one reason is a logical defect inherent in bioindicators themselves, and another reason is that children in elementary school are too young to learn the scientific basis of water quality. Participating in clean-up activities at rivers and lakes did not affect whether a student indicated on the questionnaire that these activities were“an action which is significant to improve the quality of river water”. However, for the same questionnaire item, participating in the bioindicator program increased the selection rate for some choices such as“using phosphorus-free detergents”,“planting aquatic plants”, and“distributing the effective microorganisms (EM)”, with the latter choice being an obvious example of pseudoscience. Our results indicated that participating in the bioindicator program is very effective for fostering an interest in nature and the environment, but it is ineffective for enhancing scientific understanding of water quality. Based on these results, we propose four points for improving the bioindicator programs for school children: (1) if aquatic faunae are associated with water quality, water quality must also be measured at the same time using chemical methods; (2) bioindicators of water quality should not be taught at elementary schools but at junior or senior high schools; (3) environmental factors other than water quality must be considered when the bioindicator program is carried out in schools; and (4) in elementary schools, aquatic organisms should be used as tools for understanding biodiversity and local environments.