.9 I I 1
o Congress
Prepared for Congress
by the
National Environmental Education Advisory Council
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Education
Washington, DC
July 2001
-------
-------
Report to Congress
Prepared for Congress
by the National Environmental Education Advisory Council
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Education
Washington, DC
July 2001
-------
Contents
I Foreword
I
Section 1. Introduction
Section 2 . Recommendations for Action
Section 3 J Rationale for the Recommendations
8
Section 4 t Obstacles and Problems Addressed by the Recommendations
13
Appendices A Position Papers of the National Environmental Education
"" I Advisory Council A-1
i,
B Summary of the National Environmental Education Act
of 1990 . B-1
C Bibliography of Selected Reports
on Environmental Education
C-1
D Members of the National Environmental Education
Advisory Council
D-1
E Environmental Education Contacts at EPA and
State Agencies
E-1
-------
REPORT TO CONGRESS II
JULY 2001
FOREWORD
This report to Congress, mandated under the National Environmental Education Act (NEEA)of 1990,
is a snapshot of environmental education's progress-to-date since the enactment of the law. It is the
second in a series offered by the National Environmental Education Advisory Council (NEEAC), the
citizen's committee created by this law to assess the status of environmental education and to report on the effects
of the Act. The Council is an eleven-member citizen body with diverse representation from across the country,
and with a wide range of public and private expertise in environmental education. Exhibit 1 presents a brief
description of the NEEAC. ^^'^ "-;>**-?
The first report to Congress, released in De^ember^lgpd,/CQntainejd several
noteworthy policy recommendations. Thaljreport was Gomprehensiye and still
stands today as an important analysis of tHejjeeds ,andj3|c_pjnm§.i3da,tio^|for the
future of environmental education. ButtTthe CouncjKindathat whileJthere is
ample evidence that most of those reeommeti'dattorJS; ar._e"Tndegd; being
r . * ""j " i-~:.-"-:-. ~ .j °
accomplished in some ways, the levels of aac,omplishmenTajreincctnsistent across
grade levels and across states and regions. -Thus, the accomplishments seem
limited when considered on a national scale. V '•*
This report is intended as a supplement to, and update of, the 1996 report. It
focuses on more detailed recommendations, and outlines specific national
strategic initiatives that more clearly cMftlaJeojirsi: for environmental education
to move forward. ; ; ~ ---,-
These conclusions are based upon an examination of the status quo of environmental
education, compared with a vision of a desired future. By comparing the status quo
' --•-;- • • " "~ "" - ...........
. . , r .- --*, . .-, , , . .
and the goals lor environmental .education, the Louncil has determine^ that the sum
of actions rescribed in-the recommendation& of; the-i596 reort have
fr National Environmental Education
jr Advisory Council
.jjjhe. National Environmental Education Advisory
•-jCpuricil (NEEAC) is.a federal advisory committee
" that was established by the National Environmental
-^Education Act of 1990 to provide independent
if advice, consultation, and recommendations to the
^Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection
JlAgency (EPA) on matters related to environmental
r education. The Council, made up of 11 members
•-' representing primary and secondary education,
colleges and universities, nonprofit organizations,
state agencies, business and industry, and senior
Americans, provides EPA With a better
understanding of the needs of schools, universities,
state departments, and educational organizations.
Mr. Mike Way, Colorado Alliance for Environmental
Education, serves as the chair of the NEEAC.
JVIs, Ginger Keho, EPA Office of Environmental
: Education, serves as the Designated Federal
^Official (DFO). A lisTof current and former members
^6f the .NEEAC is presented in Appendix D.
prescribed in-the recommendation& of;the-i596 report have lackedth<§?
critical momentum to m4ke'"a significantdifferencelihthe overall qualitViOf
, , . ?: '"l«Si,",. t*J\ fa I . t»11 VII V/l 1 i 11!
environmental educatiojrierlprt. ,
The findings and reconBnfeh"dati6ns"coritainea*in?thisi rep^H^Ire intlrfded fo'sfrengthen environmental
education at the national, state, and local levels. It is noted that there are far more detailed and wide-
ranging actions that need to take place on various levels to strengthen the national environmental
education endeavor. However, one of the key findings is that the .overall environmental education effort
is currently too fragmented to effectively fulfill its crucial role in our society.
With that in mind, the Council has concentrated its attention on a limited number of key initiatives that
hold the best opportunity for harnessing the tremendous potential of environmental education. NEEAC
recommends these initiatives be implemented in order to focus the current efforts into a well-managed,
strategic course of positive action leading to environmental literacy and education.
— The National Environmental Education Advisory Council
-------
Section 1. Introduction
Environmental Education; Pathway to Citizenship
The challenge of environmental education is to provide for the appropriate development of
environmental literacy in each successive generation and to raise the level of environmental literacy
of the American citizenry as a whole. If our Nation can meet this challenge, individuals will be more
capable of assimilating and analyzing the complex abundance of information and opinion and of making
wise decisions as consumers, employees, parents, and voters.
Our Nation's future relies on a well-educated public to be wise stewards of the very environment that
sustains us, now and in the future. It is environmental education that can best help us as individuals
make the complex conceptual connections among economic prosperity, benefits to society, environmental
health, and our own well-being. Ultimately, the collective wisdom of American citizens, gained through
education, will be the most compelling and most successful strategy for environmental management.
Among the responsibilities of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are the regulation and
enforcement of environmental laws and the dissemination of environmental information. EPA must also
embrace environmental education as an important way to involve citizens in the decision-making process
and to fulfill its role as the federal steward of the NEEA (see Appendix B for a summary of the NEEA).
Sustainable environmental quality, in balance with economic prosperity, will be achieved when the
Nation regards both as a responsibility of citizenship in a free society.
^thg geport'
This report contains four sections, including this Introduction. Section 2.6\ Reeojnmendations fo '•'Action,
identifies a list of key recommendations and describes national strategic initiatives intended 'p rrjove
environmental education forward at national, state, and local levels. Position papbrs written by rr Ambers
of the Council are referred to throughout the section and provide additional infd'rijiation about thfe topics
addressed by the recommendations. Section 3.0, Rationale for the Recomhr;iendations, pro'yid^s, a
detailed analysis of the status quo and the desired future of environmental education. The analysis,
focused on four general areas, is the basis upon which the recommendations identified in Section' 2.0
were developed. Section 4.0, Obstacles and Problems Addressed by the Rscomrriendations, summaries
the views of the Council about the challenges facing environmental education! I | i |
•!]• . I ' •-•• jj; ! ]
In addition, the report includes five appendices. Appendix A, Position PJapers of the r|atior|al
Environmental Education Advisory Council, presents five position papers wrjtjten by members ofitjie
Council. Appendix B, Summary of the National Environmental Education Act of 1990, proyides' a
general overview of the mandates and authorizations of the Act. AppenqixC, Bibliography of S^lept^d
Reports on Environmental Education, provides a list of reports and resources related to envirojimejntal
education. Appendix D, Members of the National Environmental Education Advjsory Council, identifies
current and former members of the Council. Appendix E, Environmental Education Contact^ at EPA
and State Agencies, provides information ,about EPA and state poinjs;pf contact. | j
-------
Section 2» Recommendations for Action
A Citizens'Committee Call for Action:
Improving the National Approach to Environmental Education
During the 10 years since the enactment of the NEEA, some positive advancements have been
made. Recent surveys conducted by Roper Starch Worldwide and the National Environmental
Education and Training Foundation (NEETF) have consistently indicated that 95 percent of Americans
support environmental education. That level of demand presents a challenge to the environmental
education community. The overall national environmental education effort remains far weaker than it
should be, in terms of adequate funding, coordination and leveraging of resources, and development of
effective evaluation and assessment tools. Environmental education holds great potential for increasing
environmental literacy in the United States and in the world. To capitalize on the support of the American
public and to fulfill the tremendous potential of this enterprise, it is crucial that environmental education
be more adequately nurtured and strengthened.
In this report, by far the most common theme woven among the Council's findings points to inadequate
coordination and financial support for the effort. Time and again, each of the weaknesses identified in
the field of environmental education has its roots in these common problems. Although the numerous
programs are impressive in their individual missions, they are diffuse and fragmented and therefore fail
to reach a "critical mass" capable of achieving overall direction or consistent, definitive accomplishment.
The following recommendations are intended to be more strategic than comprehensive. It is the finding
of the Council that these recommendations need immediate support as national initiatives.
List of Recommendations
Recommendation A
Recommendation B
Recommendation C
Recommendation D
Recommendation E
Strengthen national policy regarding environmental
education
Improve sustainable funding sources for systemic
environmental education funding
Improve and sustain the systemic coordination of
environmental education resources at the state level
Promote comprehensive environmental education at
all levels in the formal education system
Strengthen the evaluation and assessment of
environmental education
-------
Section 2
Recommendation A:
v ,,3.,TJ^,,:
Strengthen
. . ..
,rTJ^,,:&,;-,w^^
'
Appendix A presents the NEEAC position papers "Environmental Education and Right-to-
Need Both" and "Environmental Education is a Positive, Pro-Active Tool for
tszss&x Environmental Compliance."
Strategies:
1. Reauthorize the NEEA, with adequate and consistent annual funding.
2.
3.
4.
Revisit specified language and interpretation of the Act. For example, some of the language in
Section 6 that discusses the 25 percent to 75 percent proportional funding allocations may not represent
the optimal distribution of funds at this time. In addition, the designated roles of the NEEAC, of the
Office of Environmental Education (OEE) within EPA, and of the NEETF may warrant re-examination
and updated definition (see Exhibit 2 for a description of the NEETF). Further, as the citizens'
advisory board, the Council should be involved in rewriting and re-interpreting the Act.
Strengthen the role of EPA as the federal steward of the NEEA. The Office of Environmental
Education currently is housed within EPA's Office of Communication, Education, and Media
Relations. OEE should be removed from the office in which it currently resides; a fully staffed,
separate office should be established within the agency to integrate all of the agency's environmental ,
education activities.
The Federal Environmental Education Task Force should operate effectively and in full compliance
with the spirit of the NEEA (with EPA in a leadership role). Exhibit 3 provides information about
the task force.
National Environmental Education and liraining Foundation
Established under the provisions of the National Environmental
Education Act of 1990, the National Environmental Education and
Training Foundation (NEETF) is a private, nonprofit organization that
encourages the development of public-private partnerships to support
environmental education initiatives. Every year, NEETF awards grants
that range from $5,000 to $40,000 for various projects intended to
increase the environmental literacy of the public, its members also
initiate programs in environmental health, business and the
environment, volunteerism in natural resource management, and
educational achievement. Additional information about NEETF is
available on line at www.neetf.org.
Exhibit 3
^Federal Task Force on Environmental Education
pThe^ Federal Task Force on Environmental Education facilitates
^communication and collaboration among federal agencies and
1 departments that have common interests in supporting and implementing
^environmental education programs Chaired by EPA's Office of
fBivironmental Education, the taskforce supports joint mteragency projects
|Jhat leverage botn federal and non-federal dollars Members of the task
Ptcj3 include the U S Departments of Education, Interior, Agriculture,
ind Energy, as well as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Jie National Science Foundation, and the Peace Corps Information
"about the members of the task force, as well as examples of some of the
fpTojects underway, is provided on EPA's Office of Environmental Education
jnternet site at wwwepa gov/enviroed/ftfee html
-------
Section 2
iBecommendation B:
sustainable funding sources for systemic environmental education funding
Strategies:
1. Create a national environmental education trust fund. Consider numerous and creative alternatives
in order to develop a stable, long-term source of funding.
2. Create a block grant program that will enable states to support environmental education.
lecommendation C:
Improve and sustain the systemic coordination of environmental education
resources at the state level
Appendix A presents the NEE AC position paper "Environmental Education Capacity-
.e* Building." ' •
Strategies:
1 . Supported by national coordination, each state should design and implement systemic planning models
for the effective implementation and delivery ofenvironmental education programs arid materials.
2. Existing national environmental education electronic networking, database, and communications
systems should be expanded.
-------
Section 2
f Recommendation D: ~ j
S ::; ' ' '" t:" ••'"«. •"-[ .• .- '••"- <-•»•> - • ,|
I Promote comprehensive environmental education at all levels in the formal t
| education system ^ ;
Appendix A presents the NEEAC position paper "Environmental Education and Education
Reform."
Strategies:
1. Environmental education concepts and skills should be represented in state academic standards
and assessments. For example, distinct standards should be established for environmental education
as a separate curriculum area, or links between the concepts and skills of environmental education
and those of other curriculum disciplines should be identified and clearly stated.
2. Knowledge of environmental education concepts and skills should be tested in exit examinations
for teacher certification.
3. Organizations such as the American Association of Higher Education, the National Council for
the Accreditation of Teacher Education, and the American Association of Colleges of Teacher
Education should integrate environmental studies, teacher preparation, education for sustainability,
and environmental education.
4. Efforts should be made to increase participation of K-16 educators in professional development
organizations that promote environmental education.
5. Efforts should be made to increase partnerships among environmental education associations and
other professional education associations.
6. Establish an Office of Environmental Education in the U.S. Department of Education to serve as
the formal link to EPA and to facilitate the inclusion of environmental education in all the programs
of that Department.
-------
Recommendation E:
Strengthen the evaluation and assessment of environmental education
Appendix A presents the NEEAC position paper, "A Research Agenda for Environmental
i Education."
Strategies:_
1. Actively pursue the six specific priorities set forth in the NEEAC position paper identified above
that outlines a national environmental education research and evaluation agenda.
Those priorities are: _
.
a) Establish a national measure of environmental literacy. This would include nationwide
assessments of environmental literacy among K-16 students, educators, and adults.
b) Establish and gain adequate funding support for a national assessment of the status of
environmental education in the United States.
c) Assess the relative effectiveness of instructional materials in meeting goals of environmental
education and environmental literacy.
d) Examine the effectiveness of environmental education in helping to accomplish broader
education goals.
e) Assess the effectiveness of environmental education training for educators in pre-service, in-
service, and non-formal education.
f) Examine the links between educational effort and citizen participation with respect to the environment.
2. Create a national environmental education accreditation system based on the EE Materials:
Guidelines for Excellence prepared by the North American Association for Environmental
Education (NAAEE) to serve as a quality assurance mechanism for instructional programs in
environmental education.
3. Authorize and fund comprehensive studies to examine relationships between environmental
education and sustainable economic development.
-------
Section 3. Rationale for the Recommendations!
The recommendations set forth in this report are the result of an analysis that focused on descriptions
of the status quo and the desired future of environmental education. The recommendations are
strategies intended to bridge the gap between those two descriptions.
Through education, much has been accomplished with regard to learning about and caring for the
environment since the first Earth Day in 1970. Two successive Environmental Education Acts since
that time have measurably moved the citizenry forward in its collective stewardship of our natural
surroundings. Nonetheless, much remains to be done to broaden understanding and foster more informed
participation in the resolution of environmental issues that affect every facet of our lives.
There is significant supporting evidence available that describes specific accomplishments and precise
shortcomings in environmental education as presented, received, and subsequently practiced (Appendix
C presents a bibliography of environmental education reports). The December 1996 Report to Congress
is another source of specific information about these issues. However, current environmental education
practices call for consideration of four general areas: (1) leadership and direction; (2) perceptions
about environmental education; (3) resources/training; and (4) environmental decision-making.
|A. Leadership and Direction
A.1 A national leadership and professional development organization
Current Status
The NAAEE is an organization of
approximately 2,500 members that exercises
some proprietorship over a diverse field of
professional and para-professional educators
at all levels. Nonetheless, NAAEE's
membership and effectiveness of
representation does not yet reflect the
overwhelming support for environmental
education, and the organization has not yet
gained the widespread "authority" accorded
the National Science Teachers Association
(NSTA) or the National Council for Social
Studies (NCSS), for example.
Desired Future
The national environmental education
community must begin to speak with more
authority on pertinent education issues.
This national leadership body must strongly
promote a collaborative relationship with the
environmental education organizations at the
state level. Therefore, along with efforts to
establish certification standards for
environmental educators, the environmental;
education program should begin to resemble
those of the other disciplines, enjoying the same
ascendancy as the NSTA or the NCSS.
-------
A.2 EPA as federal steward of the Environmental Education Act
Section 3
EPA's OEE has provided a point of reference
| for many educators by virtue of its, funding
program, the numerous reference materials it
has produced, and the workshops it has
conducted. However, the goals of OEE are far
from a priority within the Agency, and, too often,
the agency has difficulty in distinguishing
between information and education.
j It is noted that the first Environmental
Education Act placed responsibility for
j environmental education within the U.S.
Department of Education. At first appearance,
this arrangement might have fostered a better
connection between environmental education
I and formal educators. However, in practice,
environmental education efforts within that
[Department did not have a national,
coordinated focus and apparently were lost
within the larger world of educational concerns.
Interagency cooperation has been sorely
lacking or minimized by organizational
provincialism. This circumstance is especially
noticeable at the federal level, but is also,
common at the state and local levels. .,.-'.
The results of both Acts, from the standpoint
of governmental leadership in the field, have
brought attention to the importance of the
j environment and environmental education
I without making environmental education part
of the fabric of the formal education system.
Desired Future
EPA is obviously the most readily identifiable
agent for environmental stewardship. For that
reason alone, that Agency is probably the best
place to center a national environmental
.education effort in terms of the role of
government. However, the agency must give
higher priority to environmental education and
make more effective use of the information goals
of the agency to enhance the education effort.
Internal cooperation must be more effective than
has been the case in past and current
environmental education task forces.
Effective alliances with other agencies must be
developed, particularly with the Department of
Education and notably with the U.S. Departments
of Energy, Interior, and Agriculture. Those
agencies have much to offer environmental
education by virtue of their missions. Such
connections should be made in a manner that
places the common good above agency
"sovereignty."
-------
,:; * !
Sif «• 'j";
I; 'W.r'!['**•• <.,, in; .,
:-i 'I F!
i*!:
S '!x
:?i| ••-, i,
!•:* | K'-iltjjj :
« i*; ;;* I '>
H ' 1 : ; ::
I , f
n I in*
I
"if"
"::|:
:™B If
i
E3EE3
.! ' i
-^ II
m
"'«,;, I-'',
! I
41
..it
;-*, '....fciri'I
10
|B. Perceptions about Environmental Education
Current Status
There remains a misperception among
policymakers, educators, and the general
public about just exactly what environmental
education is and what it means to all of us.
This problem impedes the development of an
understanding of environmental education
issues and of environmental literacy.
It appears that there is insufficient information
about education in general and environmental
education in particular, or that available data
is ineffectively used. Environmental education
is frequently perceived as a K-12 or K-16 formal
education program, leaving out nonformal and
adult audiences. These shortcomings lead to
misperceptions and biases.
Public relations and information related to the
importance of environmental education and a
pervasive understanding of the educational
issues are sorely lacking.
In short, environmental education has a public
relations problem.
It is necessary that a reasonable definition of j
environmental education be made available
and demonstrable through effective programs
(Appendix A presents the NEEAC position
paper "What is Environmental Education?")
Environmental education must be established
as an enhancement of education, and promoted
as a vehicle for education reform. It serves the
common good by helping an environmentally
literate citizenry understand how to protect and
preserve our Nation's natural surroundings
while improving the quality of life of its people.
Environmental education not only must be
perceived as an economic, social and
environmental necessity, but the perception also
must be widespread and measurable through an
on-going assessment of environmentalliteracy.
-------
Section 3
jp. Resources/Training
The inventory of environmental education,
resources exists in various degrees of quantity,
quality, availability, and potential. Attempts
have been, and are being made, to establish
guidelines for the development, selection, and
use of resources.
- ttf • '
Because few states have certification
programs for environmental education,
practicing environmental educators carry the
burden of demonstrating and,defending their
qualifications and professionalism. ....
It is uncommon to find administrators (who
supervise the work of teachers) who have any
environmental background themselves.
Training for educators in environmental
education has been spotty, although federally
funded programs (such as NEETF and OEE
grants) have attempted to fill the gap with
limited available resources, ,,1_;
Funds have been available from private
foundations, but the funding parameters of
such foundations are not always in the bes,t
interest of high-quality environmental
education. The overall effect of environmental
education funding through such sources
promotes a fragmented effort.
Funding under the NEEA has never met
appropriated levels. Further, Congress has
yet to re-authorize the Act... ,
The proliferation of media programs and materials,
print resources, and computer-generated materials
is often conflicting, ineffective, confusing, and of
varying quality. Environmental educators, or
human resources, exhibit varying levels of
expertise. Environmental education resources of
all types should be screened and validated
according to a set of widely accepted guidelines
for said materials.
Desired Future
Education majors should receive pre-service
training in environmental education, and
teachers should be exposed to effective
environmental education in-service programs.
Administrators should become familiar with the
goals of environmental education and the
essence of the training their teachers are
receiving.
Research indicates that environmental
education can be an effective means of basic
education and of environmental improvement.
Therefore, environmental education should be
increasingly prevalent in school programs and
should become apriority throughout the country.
Effective adult education programs should be
developed and implemented.
All states should implement strategic plans for
environmental education for youth and adult
audiences.
-------
Section 3
P.Environmental Decisjon-Making'
iiIBB
'
iiiiiii
12
i:J IS a
Sii:
Current Status
Much environmental decision-making is
uninformed, based upon poor research,
inadequate or conflicting data, and a lack of
understanding of the complexity of
environmental issues. Such decision-making
often reflects the biases of the decision maker,
a circumstance that is particularly true of
decisions made in communities at the local,
county, and regional levels.
At the local, state, and federal levels, agencies
dedicated to environmental problem-solving
and law enforcement do not always make
informed decisions.
Several Roper studies have found that the lack
of solid foundations for environmental decision-
making is evident among the general public,
including local planners, representatives of
business and industry, and consumers.
Resources are too often used indiscriminately
and evaluated inadequately.
Successful programs are rarely analyzed,
promoted, maintained, and evaluated
adequately.
The end goal of environmental education is to
improve environmental literacy, thereby helping
citizens better understand their role and their
responsibilities for environmental stewardship.
In turn, the collective impact of citizens'
decisions that affect the environment reflects
the overall effectiveness and value of
environmental education. Therefore...
. . . research should document whether
environmental education is an effective vehicle
for education and environmental improvement
and should include a common understanding
of what environmental education is. V:
. . .. evidence based on research should
demonstrate the effect of improved environmental
literacy on environmental stewardship,
. .. environmental education should be an
educational priority throughout the nation, for
both youth and adults.
. . . comprehensive national environmental
education legislation should support
professional development, production and
dissemination of educational materials, effective
school programs, and state strategic plans.
... long-range plans developed by states should
include coordinated environmental education
efforts within and among states.
... environmental education should be embraced
as a tool for proactive involvement of citizens in ihe
resolution of environmental problems and issues.
... the corporate world should operate with an
understanding of sustainability.
.. .effective environmental education programs
must be identified, maintained, and promoted.
-------
Section 4. i Obstacles and Problems Addressed by the Recommendations
A3 is the way with ideals and actualities, numerous obstacles prevent environmental education from
moving to a desired future outcome from its present circumstances. The recommendations and
strategies offered in this report are designed to address the following problems.
To begin with, there have never been sufficient, reliable resources available to environmental education
for the long term. Although there have been two separate enactments of national legislation supporting
environmental education, Congress has failed to re-authorize the NEEA during numerous legislative
sessions.
Also lacking is a common understanding of the true nature of environmental education, perhaps as a
result of inconsistent quality and episodic delivery. Similarly, it does not appear that the widespread
environmental literacy necessary for environmental stewardship has been realized. Too little research
evidence and too few reliable measures of environmental literacy are available to make that assertion
with confidence. It appears that neither the general public nor the corporate world fully appreciates
the link between environmental education and a sustainable economy.
Within the education system, communication and dialogue about environmental education has been
lacking among school boards, administrators, teachers, and paraprofessionals.
Capacity-building at the local and state levels has not reached its full potential. Further, the potential
of EPA, the NAAEE, and the NEETF, as well as their parallel organizations at the state level, has not
yet been realized.
Environmental education has not been effectively infused into the educational reform movement, nor
has it been institutionalized throughout K-12 or higher education. Therefore, environmental education
has not achieved the desired impact in government and business circles or in communities.
The recommendations set forth in this report outline a strategic plan for addressing these most pressing
obstacles confronting environmental education in the United States.
mmmessassm
'''
-------
-------
National Environmental
Education Advisory Council
Appendices
-------
-------
Appendix A
'osition Papers of the National Environmental Advisory Council
•.-'.•:. 'i.---', '1
vjrpnmental Education and Right-to-Know: We Need Both
A-2
InyironfTiental Education is a Positive,
*ro-Actlve Tool for Environmental Compliance
Is-'Zv1'"'1 • , ; ','-•-, • i I
Enyironment^l Education Capacity-Building
iEnvJronmental Education and Educational Reform
Researcri Agenda for Environmental Education
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
i/,hat Is Enyironmental Education?
A-8
-------
lAppendix A
Environmental EducationandRiglil^to-Know: We Need Both
Drawing a distinction between the education and information dissemination processes, the National
Environmental Education Advisory Council is suggesting a companion strategy to EPA's Right-to-Know
policy. "It is the position of the Council that good citizenship demands that the public has a 'right to
know' and access to environmental protection data, but also a 'responsibility to understand' the
implications of the information once it is provided," says Mike Way, chair of NEEAC. "We believe
environmental education is the pathway to that understanding."
One of the most positive trends of recent years has been the public's ability to easily access data about
the risk factors they face from environmental pollution. The Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) mandates that this information be readily available to the public. Hailed
as one of the most potent pieces of environmental legislation in many years, EPCRA's primary purpose
is to inform communities and citizens about the chemical hazards in their neighborhoods. Right-to-
know tools such as the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) have been the basis for dramatic success stories
in environmental protection. Yet, while data can be a valuable tool that functions as a red flag, alerting
citizens to environmental dangers, the Council believes it is only the beginning of sustainable
environmental and economic development.
Environmental education provides the knowledge and skills to understand stewardship and encourage
active participation in environmental protection. Environmental education creates citizens who are
environmentally-literate, who can take data and make sense of it. Data supports and sometimes suggests
specific courses or options, but environmental literacy allows for discussion of the options, leading to
community-based decision-making by connecting like-minded individuals. More common understanding
through education enables citizens to form relationships with one another and provides a framework to
develop community-based solutions. Thus the need for litigation as the preferred course-of-action can
be de-emphasized when problems or issues arise.
In order to fulfill our potential as environmental stewards, we certainly need verifiable sources of
information. Our families, our communities, our nation, and our world need both Right-To-Know data
programs and environmental education programs working together, consistently and cooperatively, in
order to achieve a healthy population and a healthy environment. NEEAC recommends that all
environmental protection agencies, especially the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, strengthen
their efforts by fully integrating environmental education throughout agency programs.
-------
Environmental Education is a Positive, Pro-Active Tool for Environmental Compliance
In the 1970s and 1980s, the largest source of pollution in this country was "point-source" pollution
from industrial deposit of toxics into the air, water and ground. Environmental laws and regulations
were, and remain, powerful tools for the reduction of point-source pollution. So successful have these
regulations been, in fact, that big business/industry is no longer the primary source of pollution in the
country. Additionally, industry has embraced "pollution prevention" as a way to eliminate the need for
end-of-pipe solutions, further reducing its contribution to the pollution problems. The National
Environmental Education Advisory Council believes that the era of relatively easy environmental cleanup
is behind us, and recommends using environmental education to help achieve voluntary compliance.
The Council views environmental education as a companion tool to regulation and enforcement when
targeted to the individual, the household, and small- and medium-sized business and industries.
Research shows that the largest source of pollution today is "non-point source" pollution caused by the
collective behavior of individual citizens. Reliance on our cars, insistence on perfectly shaped fruits and
vegetables, and rejection of environmentally-responsible behavior that inconveniences us in any way are
all contributing to a serious degradation of human and environmental health. Regulations represent the
lowest level of the public's commitment to a quality environment. A more worthy goal is voluntary
environmental compliance with the ultimate goal of environmental stewardship. We need a more sustainable
and higher level of commitment from our citizens to secure and maintain our collective environmental,
economic and physical health. This level of commitment carries with it the willingness to become informed
about environmental and health issues at the local communities, regional, state, national, and international
level. It also demands the ability to weigh and evaluate alternative solutions and the willingness to engage
in discourse with others of both like and unlike minds, in order to reach agreement on issue resolutions.
Environmental education has as its central mission the development of such an active citizenry.
Environmental education is a positive, effective and pro-active tool for stewardship. The major goal of
environmental education has long been to develop citizens who are aware of and concerned about the
environment and have the knowledge, skills, attitudes and commitment to work individually and together
toward solutions to past, present and future environmental issues.'1' Future economic growth is closely
linked to sustaining the quality of the environment and will be the driving force in the 21st century. The
Council believes that citizens can and should be a part of this debate over the environment and the
economy; their participation requires a level of knowledge that environmental education can provide.
The Council recommends that environmental education be considered equally important to regulation and
enforcement as major avenues for the remediation and maintenance of a healthy environment. State and
federal environmental protection agencies need to give environmental education a greater role in their efforts
to promote environmental stewardship and economic sustainability and to include environmental education
in their mission statements. The effectiveness of environmental education should be documented through a
process of pre- and post-testing; effective projects could then serve as national and state models of excellence.
• Adopted from the Belgrade Charter (UNESCO-UNER 1976)
-------
lAppendix A
A-4
JEnvironrnental Education Capacity-Building
After twenty years of designing and developing environmental education programs, a second major
trend in the evolution of environmental education has emerged. Labeled "capacity-building", it is not
so much a process nor an end result, but a family of activities, communication networks, infrastructure,
and support services. All are strategies designed to enhance the continued development and delivery
of high-quality environmental education by leveraging resources and helping develop a support web of
people and organizations at the national, state, and local levels.
Environmental education capacity-building is important because it relies on the simple logic of doing
things smarter and better, not simply working harder. Capacity-building is about maximizing efficiency,
enhancing quality, sharing and leveraging scarce resources, and improving communications.
Typical environmental education capacity-building activities include the development of a statewide
environmental education master plan; coordinating statewide annual conferences and other professional
development events; formal coordination of the states' environmental education community.
development and sharing of information clearinghouses; links to formal education; and leadership
and organizational development.
EPA has recognized the importance of building environmental education capacity at the state level and as a
national strategic priority. Through a national educator training program, called the Environmental Education
and Training Partnership, EPA is providing leadership and financial support for a program which has made
capacity building one of its essential components. EPA is also "strengthening or improving" existing programs
and building partnerships rather than "creating" more environmental education programs and curriculum.
Early support for capacity building has come from the North American Association for Environmental Education,
which has made room for a national partnership of state environmental education organizations known as the
"Affiliates Partnership." The National Environmental Education Advancement Project, run by the University
of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, has specialized in state environmental education capacity-building during the
past six years by researching, analyzing, charting progress, collecting and sharing strategies, and providing
training support for state organizations. As partners in EPA's training program these efforts have received
important resources to help strengthen and sustain their capacity-building efforts.
The National Environmental Education Advisory Council calls for continued and increased support for
environmental education capacity-building as part of a national strategy for developing quality
environmental education programs. The focus on capacity-building enhances the opportunity to develop
a nationwide systemic initiative which promotes environmental literacy. The 2000 Council re-emphasizes
the National Environmental Education Report to Congress of 1996 which addressed the importance of
capacity-building in six of the eight recommendations.
NEEAC recommends that environmental education capacity-building be given a top priority in EPA's
EE grant program at the regional and national levels. Internally, EPA offices should support environmental
education capacity-building activities at the community, state, regional, and national levels. Finally,
EPA should explore close working partnerships with state and national environmental education
networking associations.
-------
Appendix A
Environmental Education and Educational Reform
In the United States, numerous local, state, and national education reform efforts, which seek to improve
student learning, are underway. The National Environmental Education Advisory Council believes that
additional progress can be made in reaching various education reform goals by using environmental education
as a vehicle for learning. Environmental education can be an effective tool for achieving such goals
because many of the characteristics of reform are also characteristics of quality environmental education.
Educational reform emphasizes the importance of curriculum and instructional methods that are learner-
centered, use interdisciplinary approaches to learning, promote inquiry, critical thinking and problem
solving skills, use team building and group decision-making, and link learning to practical applications
in the real world. Environmental education is a learning process that begins with public awareness and
knowledge about the total environment and develops the critical thinking and problem solving skills
needed to make informed and responsible decisions that impact the environment. Well constructed
environmental education programs are learner-centered, providing students with opportunities to construct
their own understanding through hands-on, minds-on investigations. Learners engage in direct
experiences and are challenged to use higher order thinking skills. Moreover, environmental education
can support the development of an active learning community where learners share ideas, expertise,
and prompt continued inquiry.
Educational reform calls for the development of rigorous content and performance standards which
identify what students need to know and what skills they need to attain in core subject areas such as
science, math, social studies, and language arts. The National Guidelines for Environmental Education
(NAAEE, 1998) provides a set of standards for the field, and identifies consistencies between
environmental education standards and those in the content areas. Environmental education draws on
content and skills in other areas and can be utilized as a real-world application of learning in each area.
Moreover, since environmental topics are of high interest to young learners, environmental education
comprises a strong motivational tool to capture and hold the attention of learners. Environmental education
also has the potential to link to the K-12 curriculum (i.e., science with math, etc.), providing the
opportunity to meet the requirements of the core disciplines while creating a comprehensive and cohesive
course of study.
Educational reform also calls for assessments of student learning and a realignment of curriculum and
instruction to the new standards and assessment systems. And, it calls for reorganizing schools to
redefine student-teacher-parental community relationships. Through its emphasis on real-life concerns,
environmental education promotes authentic assessment. Through its emphasis on community health
and environmental issues, environmental education is also ideal for the promotion of strong and active
student-teacher-parental community relationships.
The Council calls on schools and school districts, local, state and federal agencies, non-profit
organizations, education associations, parents, and others striving to improve education to explore ways
in which environmental education can be used to advance their own education reform goals. We
advocate the use of environmental education in all appropriate learning situations.
-------
[Appendix A
A Research Agenda for Environmental Education
There exist a few landmark studies in environmental education which can be considered significant.
However, the scope of research studies tends to be limited both in geography and sample size. Thus,
environmental education research tends to reflect an array of researcher concerns and interests, with
numerous gaps in what is truly "known" about the field. Adding to the problem - there have been few
broadly-based research studies, generally not enough funding, and too few resources devoted to
environmental education research.
The National Environmental Education Advisory Council calls for increased research in a number of
areas within environmental education. The following reflect critical needs in national research priorities:
environmental literacy, the field of environmental education in general, instructional effectiveness and
the preparation of environmental educators, and the links between education and environmental
protection:
• A National Measure of Environmental Literacy Is Needed
Although research has been conducted regarding specific aspects of environmental literacy,
involving samples of specific populations, not enough is known to generalize across age levels or
broad geographic areas. Much environmental education research has focused on environmental
attitudes and knowledge, but the scarcity and uneven nature of the research findings have left us
with no real "baseline" from which to measure the effect of environmental education. The Council
calls for a national research priority which collects data across age groups and populations, and
which focuses on a comprehensive model of our nation's level of environmental literacy which
goes beyond simple measurements of attitudes, current events awareness, and knowledge of facts.
Environmental literacy assessment should include understanding of concepts and assimilation of
complex information sets.
• A National Assessment of Status of Environmental Education within the United States Is Needed
We have no broad picture of environmental education activity in the United States. Educational
mandates for environmental education vary across states, as does the environmental education
infrastructure, funding, and other resources. Additionally, many traditional disciplines which
comprise environmental education provide a variety.of "foster homes" for environmental education
within formal education. Seldom is environmental education named as a specific subject. Instead
EE is described as a part of science education, or social studies, or even language arts. In truth,
environmental education includes elements of all the traditional curriculum areas. The very diversity
and trans-disciplinary nature of environmental education exacerbates the already difficult task of
identifying and describing where environmental education is taught, who teaches it, what resources
are used, and where gaps exist. The Council calls for research which answers these basic questions
and which provides insight into how environmental education is conducted. Is it provided in
episodic and disjointed segments, or is there a long-term commitment to environmental education
with a meaningful scope and sequence guiding the selection and delivery of instructional elements?
An additional focus would examine appropriate connections for non-formal educational experiences.
-------
Appendix A
A Research Agenda for Environmental Education ... continued^
I Understand the Relative Effectiveness of Instructional Materials in Meeting the Goals of
Environmental Education (and Environmental Literacy)
There are limited but substantial studies which address the effectiveness of noteworthy
environmental education programs, but relatively few have inspected environmental education
materials and instruction comprehensively in terms of environmental literacy. Fewer still liave
addressed the literacy elements of ecological knowledge, socio-political knowledge, cognitive
skills, responsible environmental behavior, and other determinants. The Council calls for research
which examines environmental education's effectiveness in accomplishing the goals of the field,
gathering evidence on the instructional models which hold the greatest promise for accomplishing
these important outcomes.
I Examine the Effectiveness of Environmental Education in Accomplishing Broader Educational Goals
Environmental education exists within the larger context of general education for all. These
broader educational goals range from life skills (critical thinking, problem solving, verbal and
written communication, citizenship), through subject matter skills and content (science, social
studies, language arts and mathematics), to scores on achievement tests or state-developed
-standards-based assessments. The challenge in environmental education is to meet, not only the
goals associated with environmental education, but also goals related to those broader educational
concerns. The Council calls for a comprehensive examination of environmental education materials,
programs and outcomes in terms of broader educational goals.
• Assess the Effectiveness of Environmental Education Training for Educators in Pre-service, In-service,
and Non-formal Education, and Determine -which Training Models Are the Most Effective
Environmental education incorporates knowledge and skills from a variety of subject areas and those
who practice environmental education are called upon to reflect a breadth and depth of preparation not
always present in more traditional educational endeavors The Council calls for assessment which
includes the educators themselves, in terms of their own knowledge, skills, and behaviors. Additional
research should measure the outcomes of training in the workplaces of these educators, whether in
classrooms, outdoor programs, zoo and museum programs, or other educational venues.
• Examine the Effectiveness of Environmental Education in Meeting Environmental
Protection Goals
Although regulation and enforcement are effective management tools for large groups of collective
behaviors, many interactions between humans and the environment are individually determined
and unregulated. Environmental education has a role in enhancing-critical-thinking and problem-
solving skills which enable individuals to access and evaluate information and to weigh various
perspectives on issues in order to make informed and responsible decisions related to the
environment. Thus, the Council calls for research which examines the link between educational
efforts and citizen participation with respect to the environment.
-------
i Appendix A
What Is Environmental Education?
There has been a rash of criticism regarding environmental education (EE) during the past several years.
The National Environmental Education Advisory Council (NEEAC) believes that too many of the criticisms
rely on broad generalizations and misrepresentations. The Council has therefore determined it is important
to reiterate and reinforce basic points about the goals and components of environmental education.
In its infancy environmental education was viewed as a learning process that increases people's knowledge
and awareness about the environment and its associated challenges, develops the necessary skills and
expertise to address these challenges, and fosters attitudes, motivations, and commitments to make
informed decisions and take responsible action (UNESCO, Tbilisi Declaration, 1978). Environmental
education assists citizens in understanding and participating in complex environmental issues in their
communities. Environmental education enhances critical thinking, problem solving and effective
decision-making skills and enables individuals to weigh various sides of an environmental issues to
make informed and responsible decisions (Federal Register, 1996).
To clarify the relationship between knowledge, skills, and action embodied in the above definition,
educators have developed a framework that stresses a hierarchical approach to environmental literacy.
This framework includes four major goals to guide educators:
• Ecological concepts
• Conceptual awareness
• Issue investigation and evaluation
M Environmental action skills.
The ECOLOGICAL CONCEPTS goal is foundational to environmental education. The intent of this
goal is to enable individuals to gain an understanding of the natural world and to base the decision
making process upon facts and models available through the biological and geophysical sciences.
Scientifically-derived data and understandings are crucial to ecologically-sound decisions.
The CONCEPTUAL AWARENESS goal builds upon ecological and scientific knowledge by making
connections to economic and social understandings. This goal addresses the conceptual understanding
of the interactions between the processes of nature and the processes of human endeavor. Environmental
education purposely explores, cuts across, and blends traditional curriculum disciplines such as science,
social studies, and economics. In this way, the learner understands how his or her individual behavior
and societal behaviors impact the environment.
The ISSUE INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATION goal helps individuals develop the knowledge and
skills to investigate environmental issues and evaluate solutions for remediating them. These "critical
thinking" skills are a cornerstone of environmental education. The intent of this goal is to allow an
individual learner to analyze and gather information on environmental issues, including ecological and
social dimensions, and evaluate both issues and solutions. These are important elements for decision-
making and citizenship.
-------
Appendix A
siisiiiiiiiiiiiiii
What: Is Environmental Education?... continued
The ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION SKILLS goal helps individuals develop skiUs for taking responsible action,
both personally and as members of a community, to help resolve environmental issues. The intent of this goal is
to motivate the learner to "go beyond" simply thinking about or being aware of a given issue, and to take on
personal responsibility toward the resolution of the problem. This goal seeks to empower the individual to use
responsible and positive actions for helping resolve environmental issues, and to accomplish the empowerment
without advocating a particular viewpoint or side. This form of citizenship is crucial to our democracy, and thus
an important skill to learn. It should be noted that a basic tenet of environmental education stresses teaching
"how to think" about the environment, instead of "what to think." Advocating a particular side of an issue to
learners is a form of political action, not a valid process of environmental education.
The framework for achieving these four goals in environmental education is designed around the seven
components of "environmental literacy", as defined in the professional and research literature. These are:
• AFFECT — includes environmental sensitivity and other factors which allow individuals to reflect
on environmental problems/issues and to act on them if necessary.
• ECOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE — includes the knowledge of major ecological concepts, and an
understanding of how natural systems work. Also important is a knowledge and understanding of
how natural systems interface with social systems.
• SOCIO-POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE — includes an understanding of the relationship between
beliefs, political systems, and environmental values of various cultures. Socio-political knowledge
includes an understanding of how human cultural activities (e.g., religious, economic, political,
social and other) influence the environment from an ecological perspective. Also included within
this category is knowledge related to citizen participation in issue resolution.
• KNOWLEDGE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES — includes an understanding of environmental
issues and problems caused as the result of human interaction with the environment. Also included
within this category is knowledge related to alternative solutions to issues.
• COGNITIVE SKILLS — includes those abilities required to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate
information about environmental problems/issues and to evaluate a select problem/issue on the basis
of evidence and personal values. This category also includes those abilities necessary for selecting
appropriate action strategies, and for creating, evaluating, and implementing an action plan.
• INDIVIDUAL PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY—includes taking actions as they relate to personal
behaviors and re-examining personal beliefs and values.
• ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIORS—includes active and considered participation
aimed at solving problems and resolving issues. Categories of environmentally responsible actions are
persuasion, consumer action, eco-management (physical action), political action, and legal action.
The National Environmental Education Advisory Council has reviewed these goals and basic
characteristics of environmental education, and endorses the preceding guidelines with respect to the
environmental education process.
- .j||ffi
-------
-------
Appendix B
Summary of National Environmental Education Act of 1990 (P.L. 101 _619)
On November 16, 1990, the National Environmental Education Act (EL. 101_619) was signed into
law. The goal of the Act is to increase public understanding of the environment and to advance and
develop environmental education and training. It provides for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
to play a leadership role among federal agencies in implementing the new law and encourages
partnerships among federal government agencies, local educational institutions, state agencies, nonprofit
educational and environmental organizations, and the private sector.
The mandates and authorizations under the Act are as follows:
Section 1 - Title - National Environmental Education Act
Section 2 — Findings
Includes Congressional finding that environmental challenges present a significant threat to human
health and environmental quality ... and that current federal efforts to educate the public and train a
professional work force about environmental challenges and effective responses are not adequate.
States it is the policy of the United States to establish and support a program of education on the
environment.
Section 3 — Definitions
Includes various definitions for terms used in the Act.
Section 4 - Office of Environmental Education
Requires the establishment of an office of environmental education at EPA. The staff shall be headed
by a Director who is a member of the Senior Executive Service and shall include a headquarters staff
of not less, than six and not more than ten full-time equivalent employees. The regional support shall
include one full-time equivalent employee per region.
Section 5 — Environmental Education and Training Program
Requires the establishment and operation of an Environmental Education and Training Program. On
an annual basis, the EPA A4ministrator shall award a grant or cooperative agreement to an institution
of higher education or a nonprofit institution or a consortia of such institutions to establish and operate
an environmental education and training program. Purpose of the program is to train education
professionals to develop and deliver environmental education programs. Requires the program to
include teacher and education professional exchanges between the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
Section 6 — Environmental Education Grants
Authorizes EPA to award grants to educational institutions, state and local agencies, and nonprofit
organizations to support environmental education projects. Requires publication of regulations addressing
solicitation, selection, and supervision of projects as well as evaluation and dissemination of results of
projects: Grants may not exceed $250,000. Twenty five percent of grant dollars shall be awarded as
grants of $5,000 or less. Authorizes grants that foster international cooperation between the United
States, Mexico, and Canada.
sv:|:3£? '^-Tl^ ;«*;rf^fv4l"r.™v
-------
1 Appendix B|
Section 7—Internships and Fellowships
Requires EPA to facilitate internships for college students and fellowships for in-service teachers with
agencies of the federal government. To the extent practicable, there shall be 250 internships and 50
fellowships per year.
Section 8 —Awards Programs
Requires EPA to provide for national awards recognizing outstanding contributions to environmental
education. Awards shall be given to commemorate Theodore Roosevelt, Henry David Thoreau, Rachel
Carson, and Gifford Pinchot. Also authorizes "President's Environmental Youth Awards" recognizing
young people (K-12) for outstanding local environmental awareness projects.
Section 9 — Federal Task Force and National Advisory Council
Requires the establishment of a Federal Task Force and a National Environmental Education Advisory
Council to advise, consult with, and make recommendations to the Administrator on EPA's implementation
of the Act. The Federal Task Force shall include members from various federal agencies under the
leadership of EPA. The National Advisory Council shall be comprised of 11 members who represent
primary and secondary education, colleges and universities, nonprofit organizations, state agencies,
business and industry, and senior Americans.
Section 10 — National Environmental Education and Training Foundation
Requires the establishment of a National Environmental Education and Training Foundation that will
encourage private gifts for the benefit of the environmental education activities of EPA; participate with
foreign governments furthering environmental education and training worldwide; and further the
development of environmental awareness.
Section 11 — Authorization of Funds
Authorizes funds to implement the Act as follows: $12 million in FY 1992; $12 million in FY 1993;
$13 million in FY 1994; $14 million in FY 1995; and $14 million in FY 1996. NOTE: Congress
actually appropriated less than was originally authorized under the Act as follows: .$6.5 million in FY
1992; $7.2 million in FY 1993; $7.8 miUion in FY 1994; $7.8 million in FY 1995; $5.6 million in FY
1996; and $7.8 million in FY 1997.
-------
Appendix C
PJ^Iiography of Selected Reports on Environmental Education
Archie, M.; E T. Whitacre; J. Glenn; and A. Shotkin (eds.). Environmental Education in the United
States — Pastr Present, and Future. Collected Papers of the 1996 National Environmental Education
Summit, Burlingame, California. North American Association for Environmental Education.
George C. Marshall Institute. 1997. Are "We Building Environmental Literacy? Washington, B.C.
George C. Marshall Institute.
Hungerford, H. R.; W. J. Bluhm; T. L. Volk; and J. M. Ramsey (eds.). 1998. Essential Readings in
Environmental Education. Champaign, Illinois. Stipes Publishing Company.
Lieberman, G. A. and L. L. Hoody. 1998. Closing the Achievement Gap. San Diego, California. State
Education and Environmental Roundtable.
Roper Starch Worldwide. 2000. Environmental Readiness for.the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.
National Environmental Education and Training Foundation.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Report Assessing Environmental Education in the United
States and the Implementation of the National Environmental Education Act of 1990. Washington, D.C.
Office of Environmental Education.
Volk, T. L. and B. McBeth. 1998. Environmental Literacy in the United States: What Should Be,
What Is, Getting From Here to There. Washington, D.C. North American Association for Environmental
Education.
Wilke, R. and A. Ruskey. 1998. "A survey of the status of state level environmental education in the
United States — 1998 Update." Journal of Environmental Education.
-------
-------
Appendix D
imbers of the National
E^
Dr. Kristina Allen
Arizona (State Dept. of Education)
Arizona Department of Education
(1994-1996)
Richard Bardett
Texas (Business & Industry)
Mary Kay Holding Company
(2000-2003)
Rodney L. Bates
Nebraska (Business & Industry)
Bates & Associates
(1994-1996)
Dr. Kathleen A. Blanchard
Massachusetts (Non-profit)
Quebec-Labrador Foundation, Inc.
(1994-1997)
Judy Braus
Washington, DC (Primary/Secondary Education)
World Wildlife Fund
(1994-1997)
Dr. Diane Cantrell
Ohio (College/University)
The Ohio State University
(2000-2003)
Dr. Peter B. Corcoran
Florida (College and University)
Bates College
(1994-1997)
Margaret E. Cowan
Alaska (State Dept. of Education)
Alaska Department of Education
(1991-1993)
James L. Elder
Massachusetts (Business & Industry)
EarthGate.net
(2000-2002)
Jane Wilson Eller
Kentucky (State Dept. of Education)
Kentucky Environmental Education Council
(2000-2002)
Claudia R. Fowler
Louisiana (Primary/Secondary Education)
Louisiana Public Broadcasting
(1998-2000)
Catania C. Galvan
California (Non-profit)
Multicultural Environmental Communications
(1998-2000)
Cynthia A. Georgeson
Wisconsin (Business & Industry)
S. C. Johnson & Sons, Inc.
(1997-1999) '
Fenna Gatty
California (Primary/Secondary Education)
New Haven Unified School District
(1991-1992)
Dr.NorbertS. Hill
Colorado (Non-profit)
American Indian Science & Engineering Society
(1991-1992)
Richard S. Holmgren
California (Business & Industry)
Montgomery Energy Corporation
(1991-1994)
-------
i Appendix D
Cynthia Kartell-Horn,
California (Non-profit)
The Horn Foundation
(1991-1994)
Hyder Houston
Washington, DC (Non-profit)
Greater Washington Urban League
(2000-2002)
Steven C. Hulbert
Washington (Business & Industry)
Hulbert Auto Park
(1994-1997)
Arva J. Jackson
Washington, DC (Senior American)
(1994-1997)
Barry W. Jamason
New York (Senior American)
(1997-2001)
Dr. Paulette Johnson
Pennsylvania (College/University)
Slippery Rock University
(1997-2001)
Robert B. Kochtitzky
Mississippi (Senior American)
(1997-1998)
A. Marie Marrs
Washington (Primary/Secondary Education)
Bainbridge Island School District
(2000-2002)
Kathryn F. May
Georgia (Primary/Secondary Education)
Blue Ridge Elementary School
(1994-1995)
Colleen N. Murakami
Hawaii (State Dept. of Education)
Hawaii Department of Education
(1997-1999)
Victoria Newberry
Hawaii (State Dept. of Education)
Hawaii Department of Education
(2000-2003)
Tanya Oznowich
New Jersey (State Dept. of Natural Resources)
NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection
(2000-2003)
DavidW. Patti
Pennsylvania (Business & Industry)
Pennsylvania Chemical Industry Council
(1999)
Michele A, Perrault
California (Non-profit)
Sierra Club
(1991-1994)
Barbara R. Pietrucha
New Jersey (Primary/Secondary Education)
Neptune Middle School
(1997-1999)
Dr. Elroy Rodriguez
California (College/University)
University of California—Irvine
(1991)
Joan Rosner
New York (Senior American)
(1991-1992)
-------
Appendix D
Andrew W Savitz
Massachusetts (Business & Industry)
Coopers & Lybrand, L. L. E
(1997-1998)
Susan S. Seacrest
Nebraska (Non-profit)
Groundwater Foundation
(1997-1999)
John K. Strickler
Kansas (State Dept. of Natural Resources)
Kansas Association for Conservation and
Environmental Education
(1991-1997)
Virginia S. Smith
Illinois (Non-profit) ,
Keep America Beautiful
(1994-1996)
Dr. Gertrude L. Volk
Illinois (College/University)
Southern Illinois University
(1998-2000) ;
Mike F. Way
Colorado (Non-profit)
Colorado Alliance for Environmental Education
(1998-2000)
Dr. Richard J.Wilke
Wisconsin (College/University)
University of Wisconsin—Steven's Point
(1991-1997) '
Dr. Thomasena H. Woods
Virginia (Primary/Secondary Education)
Newport News Public Schools
(1991-1993)
-------
!
-------
«
sii;
""'"'f,,!1^,' "'..I I
t« I
Appendix E
ivironmental Education Contacts at EPA and State Agencies
IU.S. EPA Environmental Education Contacts
E-2
i£nvironmentdl Education Contacts in State Agencies
E-4
-------
ISAppendix E
U.S. EPA Environmental Education Contacts
EPA Headquarters
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Communications,
Education, and Media Relations
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (1704A)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 564-0443
John Kasper
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator
Office of Environmental Education
Michael Baker, Acting Director
Responsibilities: Management and Liaison to
National Environmental Education and
Training Foundation
E-mail: baker.michael@epa.gov
Diane Berger, EE Specialist
Responsibilities: Grants
E-mail: berger.diane@epa.gov
Andrew Burnett, EE Specialist
Responsibilities: Federal EE Task Force,
EE Resource Library, EPA Program Liaison
E-mail: bumett.andrew@epa.gov
Sheri Jojokian, EE Specialist
Responsibilities: Student Fellowships, Grants,
Contracts
E-mail: jojokian.sheri@epa.gov
Ginger Keho, EE Specialist
Responsibilities: Advisory Council,
International Activities
E-mail: keho.ginger@epa.gov
Kathleen MacKinnon, EE Specialist
Responsibilities: Educator Training
E-mail: mackinnon.kathleen@epa.gov
Kelly Chick, Secretary
E-mail: chick.kelly@epa.gov
-------
Appendix E
EPA Regional Environmental Education Coordinators
Region 1 — CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT
Kristen Conroy, Maria Pirie, and Joe Supple
U.S. EPA, Region 1
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (RAA)
Boston, MA 02114-2023
E-mail: conroy.kristen@epa.gov (Kristen)
pirie.maria@epa.gov (Maria)
supple.joe@epa.gov (Joe)
Region 2 — NJ, NY, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands
Terry Ippolito and Josephine Lageda
U.S. EPA, Region 2
290 Broadway, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10007
E-mail: ippolito.teresa@epa.gov
lageda.josephine@epa.gov
Region 3 — DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV
Larry Brown and Nan Ides
U.S. EPA, Region 3
1650 Arch (3C GOO)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
E-mail: brpwn.larry@epa.gov
ides.nan@epa.gov
Region 4 — AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN
Ben Blair
U.S. EPA, Region 4
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
E-mail: blair.benjamin@epa.gov
Region 5 — IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI
Suzanne Saric and Megan Gavin
U.S. EPA, Region 5
77 West Jackson Boulevard (PI-19J)
Chicago, IL 60604
saric.suzanne@epa.gov
gavin.megan@epa.gov
Region 6 — AR, LA, NM, OK, TX
Jo Taylor, Ed Curran, and Patty Senna
U.S. EPA, Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue (6XA)
Dallas, TX 75202
taylor.jo@epa.gov
curran.ed@epa.gov
senna.patty@epa.gov
Region 7 — IA, KS, MO, NE
Karen Flournoy and Denise Morrison
U.S. EPA, Region 7
901 North 5th Street
Kansas City, KS 66101
flournoy.karen@epa.gov
morrison.denise@epa.gov
Region 8 — CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY
Cece Forget and Fran Wiscomb
U.S. EPA, Region 8
One Denver Place (80C)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
forget.cece@epa.gov
wiscomb.fran@epa:gov
Region 9 — AZ, CA, HI, NV, American Samoa,
Guam, N. Marianas, Palau
Stacey Benfer
U.S. EPA, Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street (E2)
San Francisco, CA 94105
benfer.stacey@epa.gov
Region 10 — AK, ID, OR, WA
Sally Hanft and Pamela Emerson
U.S. EPA, Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue (EXA-142)
Seattle, WA 98101
hanft.sally@epa.gov
emerson.pamela@epa.gov
-------
Appendix E|
Environmental Education Contacts in State Agencies
ilffllfiii 11II lliiWil
lllllllllillllliilllll
t'tlj! j! :i
ill :
ALABAMA
Dr. Frank Heatherly
Alabama Department of Education
50 N. Ripley St., Room 3345
Montgomery, AL 36130
ALASKA
Peggy Cowan
Alaska Department of Education
801 West 10th Avenue, Suite 200
Juneau,AK 99801
ARIZONA
Kerry Baldwin
Arizona Game & Fish
2221 W. Greenway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85023
ARKANSAS
Bill Fulton
Arkansas Department of Education
4 State Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72207
CALIFORNIA
Bill Andrews
California Department of Education
721 Capitol MaH
Sacramento, CA 95814
COLORADO
Don Hollums
Colorado Department of Education
201 E. Colfax Avenue
Denver, CO 80203
CONNECTICUT
Diane Joy
Office of Env. Education
Dept. of Env. Protection
Store Level 79 Elm Street
Hartford, CT '06100
DELAWARE
John Cairns
Delaware Department of Public Instruction
PO Box 1402
Dover, DE 19903
FLORIDA
Kathy Shea Abrams
Office of EE
Florida Dept. of Education
1311a Paul Russell Rd., Suite 201
Tallahassee, FL 32301
GEORGIA
Bob Moore
Georgia Department of Education
1766 Twin Towers
East Atlanta, GA 30344
Colleen Murakami
Dept. of Educ./General Educ. Branch
189 Lunalilio Home Road, 2nd Floor
Honolulu, HI 96825
IDAHO
Dr. Richard Kay
State of Idaho, Dept. of Fish & Game
650 South Walnut, Box 25
Boise, ID 83707
-------
Appendix E
Environmental Education Contacts in State Agencies ... continued
ILLINOIS
Gwen Pollock
Illinois State Board of Education
100 North 1st Street
Springfield, IL 62777
INDIANA
Joe Wright
Office of School Assist
Dept. of Education
229 Statehouse
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2798
IOWA
Duane Toomsen
Bureau of Instruction & Curriculum
Dept. of Education
Grimes State Office Bldg.
Des Moines, IA 50319-0146
KANSAS
Greg Schell
Kansas Department of Education
120 E. Tenth
Topeka, KS 66612
KENTUCKY
Jane Wilson
Kentucky EE Council
1 Game Farm Road
Frankfort, KY 40601
LOUISIANA
Paul Long
Science & Environmental Education
State of LA Dept. of Education
RO. Box 94064
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
MAINE
Tom Keller
Maine Department of Education
Station 23
Augusta, ME 04333
MARYLAND
Gary Heath
Maryland State Department of Education
200 W. Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201
MASSACHUSETTS
Executive Office of Environ. Affairs
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
MICHIGAN
Mozell Lang
Michigan Department of Education
PO Box 30008
Lansing, MI 48909
MINNESOTA
Kathleen Lundgren
Minnesota Dept. of Education
649 Capitol Sq Bldg., 550 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
MISSISSIPPI
Brian Knippers
Mississippi Department of Education
PO Box 771
Jackson, MS 39205
.1MHUBHBMM
-------
Appendix E
Environmental Education Contacts in State Agencies ... continued
MISSOURI
G-inny Wallace
Environmental Education Office
Missouri Dept. of Conservation
PO Box 180
Jefferson City, MO 65102
MONTANA
Spencer Sartorius
Office of Public Instruction
Capitol Station
Helena, MT 59620
NEBRASKA
Jim Woodland
Nebraska Department of Education
301 Centennial Mall South
Lincoln, NE 68509
NEVADA
Eric Anderson
Nevada Department of Education
700 E. 5th Street, Capitol Complex
Carson City, NV 89710
NEWHAMPSHIRE
Dr. Edward Hendry
NH Department of Education
101 Pleasant Street
Concord, NH 03301
NEWJERSEY
Tonya Oznbwich
Office of Communications
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Environmental Education Unit CN 402
Trenton, NJ 08625-0402
NEWMEXICO
Larry Martinez
New Mexico State Department of Education
Santa Fe, NM 87501
NORTH CAROLINA
Anne Taylor
Office of Environment, Health & NR
Box 17687
Raleigh, NC 27611
NORTH DAKOTA
Curt Ericksmoen
Dept. of Public Instruction
600 E Blvd.
Bismark, ND 58501
OHIO
Dick Dieffenderfer
Ohio Department of Education
25 Front Street
Columbus, OH 43215
OKLAHOMA
Mary Stewart
Oklahoma State Department of Education
2500 N. Lincoln Blvd.
Oklahoma City, OK 73120
OREGON
Mark Page
Oregon Department of Education
255 Capitol Street, NE
Salem, OR 97310-0203
-------
Appendix E
Environmental Education Contacts in State Agencies ... continued
PENNSYLVANIA
Patricia Vathis
Office of EE
Pennsylvania Dept. of Education
333 Market Street, 8th Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17126-0333
RHODE ISLAND
Dennis Cheek
Coordinator of Math, Science & Tech
RI Dept. of Elem. and Secondary Education
22 Hayes Street, B-4
Providence, RI 02908
SOUTH CAROLINA
Linda Sinclair
South Carolina Dept. of Education
Rm 507 Rutledge Bldg.
1429 Senate St.
Colombia, SC 29201
SOUTH DAKOTA
David Erickson
South Dakota Division of Forestry
445 E. Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501
TENNESSEE
Karen Hanna Jenkins
Conservation Education
8th Floor Gateway Plaza
710 James Robertson Parkway
Nashville, TN 37243-0379
TEXAS
Irene PickHardt
Texas Education Agency
1701 N. Congress Avenue
Austin, TX 78701-1494
UTAH
Brett Moulding
Utah State Office of Education
250 East 500 South
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
VERMONT
Alan Kousen
Department of Education
120 State Street
Montpelier, VT 05620
VIRGINIA
Jim Firebaugh
Virginia Department of Education
James Monroe Bldg., PO Box 2120
Richmond, VA 23216-2120
WASHINGTON
Tony Angell
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
2800 NE 200th
Seattle, WA 98155
WEST VIRGINIA
Phyllis Barnhart
WV Dept. of Educ., Office of General Educ.
1900 Kanawha Blvd., E
Capitol Complex, Bldg. 6
Charleston, WV 25305-0330
WISCONSIN
Shelley Fisher
Wisconsin Dept. of Public Instruction
PO Box 7841
Madison, WI 53707'
WYOMING
Helen McCracken
Wyoming Department of Education
15400 Bishop Boulevard
Cheyenne, WY 82006
-------
------- |