Análise da percepção ambiental e sensibilização de educandos do ensino fundamental de uma escola pública para realização da coleta seletiva, Campina Grande - PB
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/223613085967Keywords:
Selective collection, Students, Youth and Adults, Perception, Solid wastesAbstract
This study aimed to analyze the disposal of solid waste generated in the Elementary School OurLady of the Rosary and environmental awareness among students of Youth and Adults (EJA) inrelation to the problem of Solid Waste. The teaching unit was selected because of its location andthe fact that it has available to collectors for the implementation of selective collection in theirrespective colors: yellow, green, red and blue, but they were stranded in the schoolyard as theseparation of solid waste was not occurring in a satisfactory manner, a fact that leads to theunderstanding that students, educators and employees of the school unit probably did not knowand / or were not sensitive to the importance of the collection. After data analysis and verificationof the lack of waste management in the teaching unit, was promoted moments of awareness, suchas lectures and workshops on the issue of solid waste, in order for students, educators andemployees know the difference between trash and solid waste, landfill and landfill, emphasizingthe importance of selective collection and the work of collectors of recyclable materials to reducepollution of the environment and reduction of natural resource extraction, as well as incomegeneration.
Downloads
References
BRASIL. Conselho Nacional de Meio Ambiente - CONAMA. Resolução Nº 275. 2001.
BRASIL, Política Nacional de Educação Ambiental. Lei 9795/99. Brasília, 1999.
CAPRA, F. A Teia da Vida; uma nova compreensão científica dos sistemas vivos. São Paulo: Cultrix, 1996.
MENGHINI, F. B. As trilhas interpretativas como recurso pedagógico. 2005. 103p. Dissertação (Mestrado em Educação). Centro de Ciências Humanas e da Comunicação, Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Itajaí-SC.
SILVA, M.M.P.; LEITE, V.D. Estratégias metodológicas para formação de educadores ambientais do ensino fundamental. XXVII Congresso Interamericano de Engenharia Sanitária e ambiental. Anais. Porto Alegre, 2000.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
