DOI: 10.5061/dryad.ffbg79d1z
title: Ocean literacy in youth from the prairies

description: Ocean literacy is an important component of environmental literacy because
 ecological services performed by the world’s oceans affect the
 distribution of heat and water, which directly or indirectly influences
 virtually every aspect of life on planet Earth. The importance of oceans
 on human physical health and economic prosperity, and the effects of human
 activity on ocean health, are not fully appreciated by the general public.
 This is especially the case for inland populations that rarely, if ever,
 visit the ocean. Here, we report ocean literacy of youth aged 9–14 located
 in the center of the North American continent, before and after a 4-day
 program on ocean literacy hosted at an oceanarium. Of the 31 participants
 in this sample, six had never been to the ocean, another nine had been to
 an ocean only once in their lives, and seven had been to the ocean fewer
 than 5 times. The pre-test administered at the onset of the workshop
 showed an average pre-knowledge across the seven principles of ocean
 literacy of 32.1%, which increased to 45.1% by the end of the workshop.
 The principles of ocean literacy (One big ocean, Ocean influences climate
 and Ocean is largely unexplored) had the highest rates of pre-knowledge
 and also the highest rates of learning gains suggesting either that (1)
 the workshop covered these areas particularly well, (2) these are easy
 concepts for youth to grasp, and/or (3) there was youth-to-youth transfer
 of knowledge during the workshop. Grade level (age) predicted prior
 knowledge, with older participants scoring higher than younger ones.
 Similarly, sex was a significant predictor of pre-knowledge, with female
 participants out-scoring males. Neither age nor sex affected learning gain
 during the workshop. By the end of the workshop, there was a significant
 shift toward an increasingly positive attitude about oceans, but no change
 in interest in ocean-related jobs.
description: We collected demographic data for age, sex, grade level, and the
 type of school they attend (public, private, or home-schooled). Because we
 were interested in knowing exposure of inland populations to oceans, we
 asked participants if they had even been to the ocean, with response
 options (a) Never, (b) Once, (c) More than once, (d) more than five
 times. <strong>Development of the Ocean Literacy
 assessment tool</strong> Knowledge questions
 (<strong>Table 1</strong>) were taken from a much longer list
 provided by Chen et al. (2020). We chose this resource because the
 questions have been pre-vetted and validated using psychoanalytic tools to
 ensure reliability. We selected 14 questions from Chen et al. (2020), with
 two questions assessing each of the seven ocean literacy principles. Thus,
 the survey assessed pecan literacy across all seven areas while keeping
 the survey short to be easily implemented during the workshop.
 <strong>Description of Ocean Literacy activities in the
 JACK workshop</strong> The Junior Aquarist Camp
 for Kids (JACK) workshop activities were adapted from activities described
 by the Centers for Ocean Sciences Education Excellence (http://www.cosee.net/best_activities/principle/index.html). Each session of JACK ran for four days. The day-by-day programming is described in <strong>Table 2</strong>. <strong>Data analysis</strong> Post-pre changes in responses to interest questions and overall scores on knowledge questions were compared using paired t-tests. We noticed a systematic difference in responses to the two questions, which we compared using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) using pre-workshop score as the covariate, post-workshop score as the dependent variable, and question as the categorical predictor. Responses to pre- and post-workshop knowledge questions were organized into four categories: <em>Already knew</em>: Answered the question correctly in the pre-test, and again on the post-test <em>Learned</em>: Answered incorrectly on the pre-test but correctly on the post-test <em>Did not learn</em>: Answered incorrectly on both the pre-test and post-test <em>Got confused</em>: Answered correctly on the pre-test but incorrectly on the post-test We compared the seven ocean literacy principles using contingency table analyses (based on the chi-square null distribution). Similarly, the effects of categorical predictors of sex, grade level, and previous experience with oceans were all compared using contingency table analyses. An unexpected correlation appeared between pre-knowledge of learning gain, which we assessed using linear regression. Analyses were conducted using SPSS v 28.
description: # Ocean literacy in youth from the prairies Dryad
 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ffbg79d1z ## Description of the data
 and file structure There are two files: Questionaire.csv and
 Survey_responses.csv Ocean literacy questionnaire (* indicates correct
 answer) Survey responses Column headings are: Participant: the 40
 participants for whom we received parental consent, and who filled out the
 survey. Sex: Female (F) or male (M) Grade: grade level in school for the
 following fall OceanN1O2MO3MF4: number of times they had been to the
 ocean; 1=never, 2=once, 3=more than once, 4=more than five times Column
 headings for survey responses have the Principle of Ocean Literacy (1-7)
 as the first numeral, whether it was the pre- or post-workshop iteration
 of the survey, then the question number Q(1-14), with two questions per
 principle. Survey responses: 1=correct, 2=incorrect. KnowTotPre = total
 score out of 14 on the knowledge survey before the workshop KnowTotPost =
 total score out of 14 on the knowledge survey after the workshop Two
 general interest questions, pre- and post-workshop Question 15 = How
 important are oceans to you? on a Likert scale of 1(low)-7(high) Question
 16 = How interested are you in learning more about ocean-related jobs? on
 a likert scale of 1(low)-7(high) Blank cells indicate where the
 participant did not provide a response. ## Human subjects data The data
 reported in this manuscript were from surveys completed by minors aged
 9-14. All materials, protocol, and assent language, survey questions, and
 parental consent forms were reviewed and approved by the MSUM IRB. We only
 report data for participants for whom we have explicit signed parental
 consent to use their child's responses for this study. The data
 posted with Dryad are de-identified with no more than three indirect
 identifiers (grade level, sex, and the fact that they participated in the
 summer program at MSUM in one of the four sessions in the summer of 2023).