Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review examines how ecoliteracy is defined and dimensioned in early childhood education research, which learning strategies are used to foster it, how children are assessed, and what trends and gaps appear. Following PRISMA 2020, Scopus records published between 2016 and 2026 in the Environmental Science subject area were searched in five steps (1,208 records). Twenty-two journal articles were read in full text, appraised with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and synthesized through structured thematic analysis. No study takes ecoliteracy as its principal term, and the term is absent from all 144 articles screened before the keyword limit; environmental education is the most frequent of twelve terms. Eleven studies examine nature-based outdoor learning. Ten studies do not assess children, and the four that use a scored instrument or a rubric use four different instruments. A restraint dimension is stated explicitly in only one study, and three countries contribute 14 studies. Within the reviewed corpus, the construct is used without a shared name, set of dimensions, or instrument. This study proposes a framework spanning cognitive, affective, action, ethical, and restraint dimensions as a basis for early childhood ecoliteracy instruments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jannah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: