Ill
ISSUE 26 Si AWGUST Jflai
N F 0 B R
E F
AN INFORMATION BRIEF OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
Environmental
Education
Moving into the
Educational Mainstream
Grassroots support has traditionally
been the lifeblood of environmental
education in the United States, and
such local involvement has brought
a diversity of approaches and pro-
grams. Unfortunately, these differing
approaches, along with the lack of
a unified presence and inconsistent
support at the national, state, and
local levels, have hindered efforts
to incorporate environmental educa-
tion as an integral part of the K-12
curriculum.
For decades, many educators have
recognized the potential for this
field to contribute to top-quality
education, but the larger community
is only now recognizing its promise.
Among the factors propelling envi-
ronmental education out of the
fringes and into the educational
mainstream are links between envi-
ronmental education and current
directions in education reform, and
a growing infrastructure to support
environmental education programs
at the state and local levels.
Although diverse in approach and
application, the practice of environ-
mental education is characterized by
some essential elements and per-
spectives. Environmental education
• Is based on knowledge about
ecological and social systems,
drawing on disciplines in the
natural sciences, social sciences,
and humanities. \
• Reaches beyond biological and
physical phenomena to consider
social, economic, political, tech-
nological, cultural, historical,
moral, and aesthetic .aspects of
environmental issues.
• Acknowledges that understanding
the feelings, values, attitudes, and
perceptions at the heart of envi-
ronmental issues is essential to
exploring, analyzing, and resolv-
ing these issues.
• Emphasizes critical thinking and
problem-solving skills needed
for informed, well-reasoned per-
sonal decisions and public action
(Disinger & Monroe, 1994).
As this approach to education gains
recognition and legitimacy among
educators and policymakers, some
questions about its role in formal
education emerge: }
• How can environmental educa-
tion help achieve educational
goals?
• How can comprehensive environ-
mental education programs that
advance student achievement be
initiated and maintained?
• Who needs to be involved and hi
what ways to ensure top-quality
environmental education?
-------
Environmental Education and Current Movements
in Education
Proponents of environmental education believe it supports
current directions in education reform that emphasize high-
er-order thinking skills, links to the real world, and integra-
tion of knowledge and action skills across disciplines (lozzi
& Marcinkowski, 1990; Champeau, 1992).
"Environmental education promotes good science, serious
debate, and thoughtful action," says Deborah Simmons,
director of the National Project for Excellence in Environ-
mental Education, an initiative of the North American
Association for Environmental Education. "Largely because
of its focus on citizenship, environmental education is com-
patible with other educational approaches that are now com-
ing into their own, such as service learning, character educa-
tion, and education for democratic participation." These edu-
cational approaches also share a common commitment to
making education relevant to students' lives outside class-
room walls. They extend their reach beyond the traditional
"knowledge and skills" approach to education, with lessons
that encompass feelings, beliefs, and actions. This compre-
hensive approach is a powerful tool for the social, emotion-
al, and intellectual growth of students.
Environmental education, and service learning in particular,
empower students to take responsibility for the environment
and quality of life in the communities around them. In the
Rio Grande watershed along the U.S.-Mexico border, a
binational, bicultural, bilingual program called Project del
Rio pairs service learning and environmental education.
Teams of students select environmental problems in the
watershed to investigate and act on. For instance, high
school students from Gadsden, N.M., studied the health
effects associated with shallow wells and inadequate septic
systems. Supervised by the New Mexico Border Health
Office, students ran water quality tests on wellheads in colo-
nias (shantytowns) and conducted epidemiological surveys.
Findings were used in the Border Health Advisory Board's
annual assessment of health in the colonias, which guides
efforts to protect and improve health in these poor border
communities (Archie, 2001).
Environmental education engages students' minds and
hands, often in real-world investigations that are inquiry-
based, interdisciplinary, and supportive of a standards-based
curriculum. In the wake of a devastating hurricane that
destroyed most of the landscaping work at "Village Pines
School in south Florida, a class of 5th and 6th grade stu-
dents undertook an interdisciplinary project that helped
restore the school environment. Students created a butterfly
garden, and in the process, honed mathematics, language,
communication, artistic, research, and observation skills
(Archie, 2000).
Environmental education also helps familiarize students
with careers in environmental fields. Career opportunities
related to environmental protection range from manual labor
to high-tech jobs. According to the congressionally mandat-
ed Task Force on Women, Minorities, and the Handicapped
in Science and Technology, environment-related fields repre-
sent a significant source of skilled jobs with good pay for
low-income persons (1989). Advocates also believe that
environmental education can help redress the significant
underrepresentation of minorities in careers related to the
environment by increasing their access to role models,
opportunities, and career information (McCrea, McGlauflin,
& Simmons, 1996).
Advancing Student Achievement
For more than a decade, the educational reform movement
in the United States has focused on setting standards for
learner achievement. In the early 1990s, mandated by the
Goals 2000 federal education reform act, professional
associations in the traditional disciplines began to establish
voluntary standards. As standards were being set in sci-
ence, social studies, history, language arts, and other fields,
environmental educators also began developing a compre-
hensive set of guidelines for learner outcomes in K-12
classrooms. These guidelines, published in 1999 by the
North American Association for Environmental Education,
can aid state and local efforts to provide quality education.
Excellence in Environmental Education—Guidelines for
Learning (K-12) outlines core concepts and skills that
environmentally literate citizens possess and suggests
guidelines and performance measures. Each guideline is
linked to relevant national standards in disciplines such as
mathematics, language arts, science, and social studies.
These links allow environmental education to meet the
standards set by traditional disciplines while synthesizing
knowledge and experience across disciplines.
Based on a compilation of case studies of schools that use
environmental education as the focus for their curriculum,
Marcia P. Sward of the National Environmental Education
and Training Foundation found "current evidence support-
-------
ENVIRONMENT AS AN INTEGRATING
CONTEXT (EIC) AND STUDENT IIW P R 0 V E Bll E N T
REPORT OF FINDINGS FROM A STUDY OF 40 SCHOOLS DSING EIC-RASED INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES.
General Educational Parameters
% of Educators Reporting Student
Improvement in This Area
# of Educators Responding
to This Survey Item
Standardized test scores
77%
60
Grade point averages
73%
101
Improved behavior
70%
162
Student engagement and enthusiasm
98%
173
Ability and willingness to stay on task
89%
171
Adaptability to various learning styles
94%
161
Practicing civility toward others
93%
157
Source: Adapted from Closing the Achievement Gap: Using the Environment as an Integrating Context for Learning,
by G. A. Lieberman & L. L, Hoody, 1998. San Diego, CA: State Education and Environment Roundtable.
ing the premise that, compared to traditional educational
approaches, environmental-based education improves aca-
demic performance across the curriculum" (Glenn, 2000,
p. 5). Likewise, a report developed by the North American
Association for Environmental Education demonstrated
that environmental education can help improve the overall
quality of education. In the schools and collaborative pro-
grams highlighted in the report,
• Reading scores improved, sometimes spectacularly.
• Math scores improved.
• Students performed better in science and social studies.
• Students developed the ability to make connections and
transfer their knowledge from familiar to unfamiliar
contexts. ;
• Students learned to "do science" rather than just "learn
about science."
• Classroom discipline problems declined.
• Every child had the opportunity to learn at a high level
(Glenn, 2000, pp. 3-4).
The State Education and Environment Roundtable's study
of environmental education strategies at 40 schools "indi-
cates that students learn more effectively within an envi-
ronment-based context than within a traditional educa-
tional framework," according to Gerald Lieberman and
Linda Hoody. The 12 state education agencies in the
roundtable designed the 1998 study, titled Closing
the Achievement Gap: Using the Environment as an
Integrating Context for Learning. Lieberman and Hoody
conclude from the study that the comprehensive educa-
tional framework used with environment-based curricula
appears to have benefits over "traditional compartmental-
ized approaches." They also find that performance on tra-
ditional measures of competence as well as student enthu-
siasm and motivation tend to increase. The improvement
in student performance is often dramatic (1998, p. 2).
One approach that uses environmental education to
improve student achievement is Environment as an
Integrating Context (EIC). ElC-based instruction uses a
school's surroundings and community as a framework
and context for learning. EIC strategies use proven con-
structivist and learner-centered education practices.
Student performance at Hawley Environmental
Elementary School in Milwaukee, Wise., is one illustra-
tion of the effectiveness of a rigorous environment-based
curriculum. In 1989, this K-5 school suffered from
discipline problems and poor academic achievement. The
process of creating an integrated environment-based cur-
riculum heightened the professional team spirit of the
-------
school's teachers, according to school staff. The results of
implementing and fine-tuning this curriculum are visible
in the superior performance of Hawley students on state
tests and nationally normed assessments. In 1998, profi-
ciency levels in reading exceeded all other Wisconsin
schools located in areas with similar income levels, and
also exceeded the statewide average. Proficiency levels in
mathematics also dramatically exceeded those of other
low-income schools, and hovered near the statewide aver-
age (Glenn, 2000).
Challenges lo Implementing Environmental
Education hi Our Schools
Environmental education has long been seen by many
teachers as an add-on that is difficult to fit into a crowded
schedule. A nationwide Roper-Starch poll, however,
showed that 95 percent of parents support teaching environ-
mental education in the schools (2000). According to Kevin
Coyle, president of the National Environmental Education
and Training Foundation, "It is dramatically clear that near-
ly every parent supports the idea that our children should be
learning about the environment as part of a basic course of
study. But it surprised us to learn there are so many other
reasons why adults approve of environmental education,"
including community service experience, improved science
learning, and greater respect for the people and places
around them (National Environmental Education and
Training Foundation, 2001a, p. 1).
Despite its perceived importance, not enough teachers con-
sistently include environmental education in the curricula
they teach. According to a nationwide survey of public
school teachers, 61 percent say they include environmental
topics in their curricula, but the percentage varies dramati-
cally across the grade levels. While 83 percent of K-4
teachers incorporate environmental topics, the percentage
drops to 58 percent for 5-8 grade teachers and to only 44
percent for high school teachers. The report also found that
only a few environmental topics, such as recycling and
solid waste management, are being taught on a regular
basis (Survey Research Center, 2000).
To be truly effective, a comprehensive, cohesive environ-
mental education program must be implemented across all
grade levels. One reason this is not happening consistently
is such programs' lack of inclusion in state-level education-
al priorities. Although the number of states that committed
funding to environmental education increased during the
PROGRESS TOWARD COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMS
AN OVERVIEW OF STATE INFRASTRUCTURE
Many states are advocating or supporting comprehensive environmental education (EE) programs that are integrated into the
formal K-12 curriculum. Here is an overview of how widespread several critical components of this support structure are:
Comprehensive Program Component
Number of States*
Requirements for including EE in curriculum
18
EE learning objectives incorporated into curriculum guidelines
30
Inclusion of EE in statewide assessment strategies
34
EE preservice training requirement for teacher certification
Coordinated system of inservice EE training programs
34
State EE funding sources
32
Computerized EE resource network
40
* Refers to number of states in which this program component existed or was being developed in 1998. - ,--'-.
Source: Adapted from "A Survey of the Status of State-Level Environmental Education in the United States—1998 Update"
by A. Ruskey.R. Wilke, &T. Beasley, Spring 2001. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3). ' : r ^'
-------
AN INFOR^ATlQMmiEF PJvTHE ASg^CIATK?^^ DEVELOPMENT
1990s, nationwide the level of direct funding for in-school
offerings is minimal. In 1998, the total amount committed
to environmental education programs in 32 states was less
than $7.3 million, according to "A Survey of the Status
of State-Level Environmental Education in the United
States—1998 Update" (Ruskey, Wilke, & Beasley, 2001).
Abby Ruskey and her colleagues at the National Environ-
mental Education Advancement Project recognize that
committing funds to environmental education is an impor-
tant step, but they say the current annual investment is
"grossly inadequate."
Many educators see teacher training as a missing piece of
the puzzle for top-quality, comprehensive environmental
education programs. The 1998 state survey revealed that
although 15 states required an environmental education
component in K-12 curricula and some 30 states offered a
coordinated system of environmental education inservice
programs, only 4 states included preservice environmental
education training as a criteria for teacher certification
(Ruskey et al., 2001). In a couple of other states, educa-
tion leaders are coordinating a more informal, institution-
by-institution approach to preservice environmental
education training.
A lack of teacher preparation in environmental education
was confirmed by the Survey Research Center in its 2000
nationwide survey of teachers. Prior to becoming teachers,
only about 10 percent of the respondents had taken cours-
es in environmental teaching methods, and less than a
third (26 percent) had prior course work in environmental
science, ecology, or environmental studies. Including both
preservice and inservice training, 39 percent of teachers
had been educated in environmental teaching methods,
while 62 percent had received some training in environ-
ment-related subject areas (Survey Research Center,
2000).
According to Rick Wilke, University of Wisconsin
Distinguished Professor of Environmental Education,
"Preservice training helps teachers provide more and
higher quality instruction, and capitalize on the use of
environmental education to enhance student learning in
other disciplines and contribute to education reform."
Wilke's research involving Wisconsin teachers demon-
strated that "the majority of preservice teachers indicated
they would not have taken a course in environmental edu-
cation if it were not required. After completing the course,
nearly 80 percent said the preservice environmental edu-
cation course had contributed as much or more to their
teacher training than any other course they took."
Linking Environmental Education and Forma! Education
Educators and researchers have worked hard to demon-
strate the relevance of environmental education to the
larger field of K-12 formal education. Strengthening this
connection is one of the goals of the Environmental
Education and Training Partnership (EETAP). EETAP is
funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) Office of Environmental Education as authorized
under the National Environmental Education Act. Since
1995, this collaboration of some 20 partner organizations
across the country has promoted the link between environ-
mental education and traditional subject areas and provid-
ed tools to help educators realize the potential of environ-
mental education to further the cause of education reform
(Archie, 2001). To this end,
• The three largest national environmental education
projects (Project WET, Project Learning Tree, and
Project WILD) have correlated their curriculum materi-
als to national and state standards, and have incorporat-
ed these links into educator workshops (Archie, 2001).
These correlations save educators time when they
develop classroom activities and plan curricula.
• Twenty-one states, as of 1998, had model environmen-
tal education programs in place to test and demonstrate
environmental education as a vehicle for achieving
school improvement goals (Ruskey et al., 2001).
• Nineteen states, as of 1998, had correlated their state
content standards with the goals and objectives of envi-
ronmental education, identifying learner outcomes,
objectives, benchmarks, and essential skills that also fit
within a model environmental education curriculum.
Fourteen additional states were developing these corre-
lations (Ruskey et al., 2001).
• Professional associations have made the link between
environmental education and education reform a focal
point for state and national gatherings such as the 1999
conference of the North American Association for
Environmental Education.
Ongoing EETAP goals include forging partnerships
among environmental education organizations and formal
education professional associations such as ASCD. These
partnerships will further strengthen the links between
environmental education and education reform, and create
-------
opportunities for learning, discussion, and advancement of
mutual goals (Archie, 2001).
Sustaining Programs
Environmental education practitioners point to waxing and
waning support from the federal government as an ongo-
ing challenge to sustaining meaningful environmental
education programs at state and local levels. The first
National Environmental Education Act was passed hi
1970, when public support for environmental protection
was at a high point. This act was limited in scope, partial-
ly funded from 1971 to 1975, and not reauthorized in
1981. In 1990, Congress passed and President George
H.W. Bush signed into law the 1990 National Environ-
mental Education Act, marking renewed federal support
for environmental education (Braus & Disinger, 1998).
State environmental education associations, centers, and
coalitions often spearhead efforts to develop and sustain
comprehensive environmental education programs and
provide professional development services. Professional
associations dedicated to environmental education are
established in 47 states, and statewide environmental edu-
cation centers are active hi 18 states. The original push to
build support for environmental education programs was
focused on the state level, because educational policy and
direction is largely set there. Now that a good number of
states have developed significant infrastructure and sup-
port, many environmental education supporters believe it
is time to give more attention to the local level, where
the "educational rubber" hits the road. Ruskey writes,
"Without question, the extent to which we will achieve
environmental literacy and environmental sustainabiliry
will be the extent to which local level [environmental
education] programs are developed and institutionalized"
(2000).
An Agenda for Increased Focus
In the past year, a number of organizations have issued
recommendations for creating and sustaining strong envi-
ronmental education programs nationwide. Among these
are the National Council for Science, Policy and the
Environment (2000), the National Environmental Educa-
tion and Training Foundation (200 Ib), and the National
Environmental Education Advisory Council (2000).
Although each report offers varied advice, common rec-
ommendations have emerged, such as the following:
• Congress should reauthorize the National Environ-
mental Education Act and increase funding and other
resources for EPA to administer this program.
• Congress and EPA should strengthen EPA's Office of
Environmental Education by consolidating all agency
education programs and projects into this office, and
mandate a senior-level federal task force that sets envi-
ronmental education policy and strategy for the federal
government.
• Congress and the U.S. Department of Education
should establish an Office of Environmental Education
within the department to serve as a link with EPA.
• EPA and the U.S. Department of Education, along with
major national education organizations and institutions,
should support the establishment of an education and
environment partnership to demonstrate the effectiveness
of using the environment as an integrating context for
improving student learning. This partnership would be
modeled after the Arts Education Partnership supported
by the Education Department, the National Endowment
for the Arts, and other educational institutions.
Simmons of the National Project for Excellence in
Environmental Education notes, "Although there is
certainly room for improvement, many elements of the
infrastructure to support top-quality environmental educa-
tion programs have been put in place. Within this context,
superintendents, principals, curriculum directors, and
teachers are critical players in incorporating environmen-
tal education as a comprehensive, cohesive part of the
K-12 curriculum. The extent to which environmental
THE ASCD POSITION
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION
Because people in developed nations are rapidly
consuming Earth's natural resources and because
the world population is increasing rapidly, human
beings must take individual and social responsibility
for the environment. Schools should provide envi-
ronmental education.
What We Believe: Positions of the Association for
Supervision and^ Curriculum Development. Revised
2001. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
"and Curriculum Development.
-------
AN INFORMATION
BRIEF OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
education is included in state standards and testing, as well
as in preservice teacher training, will be strongly influenced
by the demand generated school by school, district by dis-
trict." Environmental education proponents believe that stu-
dents, schools, and the community all win when the engag-
ing and effective approaches of environment-based learning
are brought into the education mainstream.
References
Archie, M. (2000). Excellence in environmental education:
Guidelines for learning (K-12). Washington, DC: North
American Association for Environmental Education.
Archie, M. (2001). EETAP celebrates: Five years of advancing
education and environmental literacy... and next steps.
Washington, DC: North American Association for
Environmental Education.
Archie, M., & Simmons, D. (1999/2000, Winter).
Environmental education in a "reforming" education
world: Tools for staying relevant. Taproot, 9-11.
Braus, J., & Disinger, J. (1998). Educational roots of environ-
mental education in the United States and their relation-
ship to its current status. In M. Archie (Ed.),
Environmental education in the United States—Past,
present, and future: Collected papers of the 1996
National Environmental Education Summit, Burlingame,
California, USA. Washington, DC: North American
Association for Environmental Education.
Champeau, R. (1992). Environmental education in Wisconsin:
Are -we -walking the talk? Stevens Point, WI: Wisconsin
Center for Environmental Education, University of
Wisconsin Stevens Point.
Disinger, J. R, & Monroe, M. (1994). Defining environmental
education: An EE toolbox workshop resource manual.
Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, National
Consortium for Environmental Education and Training.
Glenn, J. L. (2000). Environment-based education: Creating
high performance schools and students. Washington,
DC: The National Environmental Education and
Training Foundation.
lozzi, L., & Marcinkowski, T. (1990). Assessment of learning
outcomes in environmental education. In M. Maldague
(Ed.), Methods and techniques for evaluating environ-
mental education. Paris: UNESCO.
Lieberman, G. A., & Hoody, L. L. (1998). Closing the achieve-
ment gap: Using the environment as an integrating con-
text for learning. San Diego, CA: State Education and
Environment Roundtable.
McCrea, E., McGlauflin, K., & Simmons, D. (1996). The need
for environmental education in the United States. In M.
Archie (Ed.), Environmental education in the United
States—Past, present, and future: Collected papers of
the 1996 National Environmental Education Summit,
Burlingame, California, USA. Washington, DC: North
American Association for Environmental Education.
National Environmental Education Advisory Council. (2000).
Report to Congress II, unpublished draft. Washington,
DC: Author.
National Council for Science and the Environment. (2000).
Recommendations for improving the scientific basis for
environmental decisionmaking. Washington, DC:
Author.
National Environmental Education and Training Foundation.
(200la, May 25). Environmental learning is a right and
a basic need. [Press release].
National Environmental Education and Training Foundation.
(2001b, May 16). Legislation -would reauthorize 1990
Act and add new program of support for higher educa-
tion for environmental stewardship. [Press release].
Roper-Starch Worldwide. (2000). The national report card on
environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviors: The
ninth annual survey of adult Americans. Washington,
DC: National Environmental Education and Training
Foundation.
Ruskey, A. (2000, Fall). On the horizon: Networking com-
prehensive EE programs at the local level [online].
The Environmental Education Advocate. Available:
http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/neeap/neeapservices/
newsletters/faOOoh.htm.
Ruskey, A., Wilke, R., & Beasley, T. (2001, Spring). A survey
of the status of state-level environmental education in
the United States—1998 Update. Journal of
Environmental Education.
Survey Research Center. (2000). Environmental studies in the
K—12 classroom: A teacher's view. Washington, DC:
North American Association for Environmental
Education and Environmental Literacy Council.
Task Force on Women, Minorities, and the Handicapped in
Science and Technology. (1989, December). Changing
America: The new face of science and engineering.
Washington, DC: Author.
Environmental Education Resources
Environmental Education and Training Partnership
http://www.eetap.org
College of Natural Resources
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
Stevens Point, WI 54481
715-346-4958
Environmental Literacy Council
http://www.enviroliteracy.org
1730 K Street, N.W., Suite 905
Washington, DC 20006-3868
202-296-0390
-------
National Council for Science and the Environment
http://cnie.org
1725 K Street NW, Suite 212
Washington, DC 20006-1401
202-530-5810
National Environmental Education Advancement Project
http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/neeap
College of Natural Resources
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
Stevens Point, WI54481
715-346-4748
National Environmental Education and
Training Foundation
http://www.neetf.org
1707 H Street, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, DC 20006-3915
202-833-2933
National Project for Excellence in Environmental Education
http:/Avww.naaee.org/npeee/npeee.html
Deborah Simmons
Northern Illinois University
Department of Teacher Education
Dekalb,IL60115
815-753-9069
North American Association for Environmental Education
http://www.naaee.org
410 Tarvin Road
Rock Spring, GA 30739
706-764-2926
State Education and Environment Roundtable
http://www.seer.org
16486 Bernardo Center Drive, Suite 328
San Diego, CA 92128
858-676-0272
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Education
http://www.epa.gov/enviroed
Office of Communications, Education, and Media Relations
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (1704A)
Washington, DC 20460
202-564-0443
Michele Archie, author of this Infobrief, is an ASCD con-
sultant and freelance writer. She has a background in envi-
ronmental education and is involved with promoting civic
engagement around environmental issues.
This publication was funded by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental
Education under agreement number NE-82865901-0
between the U.S. EPA and the University of Wisconsin—
Stevens Point.
The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the United States Environmental
Protection Agency or the Board of Regents of the Univer-
sity of Wisconsin system, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsements of recom-
mendation for use.
ASCD Infobrief provides concise information on current education
Issues to administrators, teachers, families, policymakers, journalists,
and others. For more Information, contact Don Ernst at 703-575-
5611 or dernst@ascd.org, or Barbara Gleason at 703-575-5610 or
bgleason@ascd.org.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
1703 North Beauregard Street
Alexandria,VA 22311-1714 USA
Telephone: 703-578-9600 or 800-933-2723
Fax:703-575-5400
ASCD is a diverse, international community
of educators, forging covenants in teaching
and learning for the success of all learners. WWW.ASCD.ORG
Gene R. Carter, Executive Director
Diane G. Bcrrcth, Deputy Executive Director Amy Eckman, Associate Editor
for Polcy ond Planning Kimberly Lau, Electronic Publishing Specialist
Don Ernst, Director of Government Relations Dina Murray Seamon, Production Specialist
Barbara Gleason, Director of Public Information
Gary Bloom, Director of Design ond
Production Senfces
(ISSN 1091-2649)
2001-02 ASCD EXECUTIVE COUNCIL .
Kay A. Musgrove (President), Peyton Williams Jr. (President-Elect), LeRby E. Hay
(Immediate Past President), Pat Ashcraft, Martha Bruckner, Mary Ellen Freeley,
Richard L Hanzelka, Douglas E. Harris, Mildred Huey, Susan Kerns, Robert Nicely Jr.,
JamesTayler.AndrewTolbert, Sandra K.Wegner,Jill DorlerWilson
SUBSCRIPTIONS
ASCD Infobrief is published four times per year. An annual subscription may be
purchased for $ 12.50. (Subscription is included in ASCD Premium membership.)
To subscribe, contact the ASCD Service Center at 800-933-2723 or 703-578-9600.
DUPLICATION . -./.; , : ' .
Readers may make up to 100 photocopies of a single ASCD Infobrief, provided that
each copy includes a full citation of the source.Those who wish to .make more than
100 copies may do so for a small fee by contacting the Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Phone: 508-750-8400. Fax: 508-750-
4470. ASCD has authorized the CCC to collect such fees on its behalf.
Single-issue copies
of ASCD Infobrief
may be ordered at
the following rates:
I copy $4.50
10 copies $30.00
25 copies $50.00
50 copies $90.00
ASCD Service Center: 800-933-2723
When ordering, please cite Stock'No. jpi322
1 Other recent Infobrief Issues
Technology in Schools (199215)
Health and Education (199255)
Professional Development (199279)
Service Learning (199345)
Rural Education, Rural Schools (100231)
Educating Students with Disabilities (100277)
Ensuring Teacher Quality (100297)
Hlgh-Stakes Tests (101076)
Private School Vouchers (101245)
Character Education (101290)
©2001 by ASCD
------- |