47

REPORT ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

IN THE UNITED STATES

AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ACT OF 1990

Prepared for Congress

by the

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COUNCIL

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION DIVISION

WASHINGTON, DC

DECEMBER 1996
48

LETTER FROM THE

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COUNCIL

This report is submitted to Congress as mandated under the National

Environmental Education Act of 1990. Under the Act, the Council is charged with

describing the status of environmental education in the United States; updating

Congress on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s progress in implementing

the Act; and offering recommendations for strengthening environmental education at

the national, state, and local levels.

We believe that environmental education is best developed and implemented

at state and local levels. However, the federal government plays a critical role in

helping to guide, encourage, and sustain such efforts over the long term.

Environmental education should be a life-long learning process for Americans—both

young and old. To be a life-long learning process, environmental education must be

better integrated in the nation’s schools, colleges, and universities as well as an

integral part of business transactions and community-based activities.

Environmental education is needed to provide community groups, government

officials, business and industry, and private citizens with the awareness, knowledge,

and problem-solving skills needed to work together to actively and successfully

address this nation’s environmental challenges and to ensure a healthy and

sustainable environment for present and future generations.

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. This report is not a research document, and no new data

was collected to produce it. Instead, the report relies on information from earlier

studies, surveys, and reviews, as well as interviews with a host of professionals and

opinion-makers in the environmental education field. It also reflects our collective

expertise as educators and environmental protection specialists from various walks

of life. A special acknowledgment is due to the North American Association for

Environmental Education for its assistance in the preparation of this report.

We note that since the passage of the Act, there has been an urgency to more

finely hone risk assessment and sound management of public mandates. This argues

for a richer dialogue with various stakeholders to increase our chance of a healthful

environment—today and tomorrow. The Council does not shrink from this charge

and continues to work together with other stakeholders to ensure human health and

environmental protection through environmental education. It is our intent to seek

and share counsel among those many vested American interests to strengthen and

expand environmental education as a critical link in our chain of environmental

stewardship. We believe this report to Congress is an important link in that chain.

Arva J. Jackson, Chair

National Environmental Education Advisory Council
49

On November 16, 1990, the President

signed into law the National Environmental

Education Act (P.L. 101-619). The Act

presented the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) its first Congressional mandate to strengthen

and expand environmental education as an integral

part of its mission to protect the environment. The

Act mandated various programs and activities, each

administered by EPA’s Environmental Education

Division: an environmental education and training

program; a grants program; an awards program; an

internship and fellowship program; and a federal

task force and national advisory council. This report

to Congress, prepared by the National Environmental

Education Advisory Council, describes the current

status of environmental education in

the United States, discusses EPA’s

progress in implementing the Act,

and recommends further steps that

Congress and various stakeholders

can take to strengthen

environmental education

nationwide.

The Council believes that

environmental education is critical

and relevant to the daily lives of all

Americans. Environmental

education is critical because

complex environmental challenges

require a well-trained environmental workforce and

an educated public who have the knowledge and

skills to fully and actively participate in solving these

problems. Environmental education is relevant

because it can help to ensure the health and welfare

of the nation by protecting human health, advancing

quality education, expanding employment

opportunities, promoting sustainable development,

and protecting our natural heritage.

As evidenced by numerous national public opinion

polls, citizens are concerned about the environment.

The demand for environmental education in schools

and communities remains high, as demonstrated by

the overwhelming number of applications EPA and

other government agencies and foundations have

received to support environmental education projects.

During the past five years, EPA’s Environmental

Education Division has received approximately

10,000 applications requesting $300 million, but has

only been able to fund approximately 1,200 proposals

with the nearly $13 million appropriated by Congress

(or 12 percent of all applications received and 4

percent of the total amount of money requested).

However, the public presently lacks sufficient

knowledge, skills, and motivation to understand and

implement the kinds of solutions needed to address

today’s environmental challenges.

Environmental education is a learning process that

increases people’s knowledge and awareness about

the environment and 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. Unlike most formal education

efforts, the most effective environmental education

programs have a distinct “action”

component whose purpose is to

encourage responsible, enduring

decisions and actions that impact

the environment. Encouraging

“action” means teaching

individuals how to examine a range

of possible courses of action to

address or resolve an

environmental challenge after an

investigation and evaluation has

determined that action is needed.

For example, taking “action” may

involve removing lead paint from

homes or soil or creating physical

barriers to human exposure once testing has

determined that lead contamination is present at

levels that adversely impact human health.

Environmental education programs that include an

“action” component should not advocate a particular

solution to an environmental challenge. Rather, they

should provide individuals with the information,

critical-thinking, and decision-making skills they

need to make their own responsible decisions among

a range of options.

In developing this report, the Council has reviewed a

multitude of exciting and innovative environmental

education programs taking place across the country.

Such programs are supported by a variety of players,

including schools, colleges, and universities; federal

agencies; state, local, and tribal governments;

nongovernmental organizations; business and

industry; the media; and others working at national,

state, and local levels. In each sector, agencies and

organizations are working to enhance formal

environmental education programs that target

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

i
50

students, teachers, and faculty, as well as nonformal

programs that target adults, communities, senior

citizens, and other specific audiences outside the

formal education system. These programs vary in

scope and effectiveness, but all have contributed to

the goals of environmental education.

At the same time, the Council has found that the field

of environmental education faces many issues and

challenges, such as limited resources to sustain

programs over the long-term; gaps in program

development and access to quality materials; and

inadequate support for in-service and pre-service

teacher training. In addition, because environmental

education is not viewed as a national priority,

universal guidelines do not exist to assure quality

program development and implementation, and it is

not often well integrated into state and local

education reform efforts.

The Council believes that the federal government, and

specifically EPA’s Environmental Education Division

(EED), has an important role to play in strengthening

environmental education. During its first five years,

EPA’s Environmental Education Division has

accomplished a great deal. The Environmental

Education Division has established an annual grants

program; a national training program for education

professionals; three advisory committees that link

EPA offices and regions, federal agencies, and the

field; an awards program; and an internship and

scholarship program. The Environmental Education

Division also has supported the work of the National

Environmental Education and Training Foundation

and administered the President’s Environmental

Youth Awards Program.

The Council also believes that EPA’s Environmental

Education Division’s implementation of the Act has

responded to many of the issues and challenges faced

by the field. For example, the grant, training, and

internship and scholarship programs provide

support for teacher training, culturally-diverse and

low-income populations, and environmental careers.

These programs also support the development of

guidelines to ensure quality materials and programs,

an electronic network of existing clearinghouses to

improve access to materials and information on

programs, and state and local education reform

initiatives to ensure the long-term sustainability of

programs.

However, EPA is only one of many important players

and their resources are limited. In addition, much

more needs to be done to overcome the increasing

challenges facing the field and strengthen the

effectiveness of the federal role in supporting state,

local, and tribal efforts. Environmental education

needs increased support, participation, collaboration,

and coordination from all stakeholders—including

federal agencies; state, local, and tribal governments;

educators and education organizations; schools and

their boards and administrators; colleges and

universities; foundations; nonprofit organizations;

individual citizens and community groups; and the

private sector. To succeed, these stakeholders need to

work more collaboratively to:

• Make environmental education a priority across

the country and enhance EPA’s leadership role

• Increase and sustain support for state, local, and

tribal efforts in environmental education

• Leverage public and private resources and

strengthen long-term, cross-sector partnerships

• Enhance and increase support for professional

development for teachers and nonformal

educators

• Integrate environmental education into

educational reform and improvement

• Target new audiences

• Increase support for evaluation, complete

environmental education guidelines, and

improve access to quality materials and

information on programs

• Encourage and support environmental careers

The Council believes that all Americans must be

educated to see themselves as stakeholders who have

the knowledge, skills, and motivation to make

informed decisions and to take responsible actions in

a world of complex environmental challenges.

ii
51

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND WHY DO WE NEED IT? 2

A. GOALS, GUIDING PRINCIPLES, AND DEFINITIONS 2

B. NEED AND RELEVANCE TO AMERICANS’ EVERYDAY LIVES 2

III. STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES 7

A. APPROACHES AND AUDIENCES 7

B. WHO DELIVERS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS 11

C. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES 14

IV. IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ACT OF 1990 18

A. INTRODUCTION 18

B. SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS 18

C. BACKGROUND ON ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AT EPA 18

D. EPA’S ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION MISSION AND GOALS 19

E. OCEPA ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION DIVISION’S MAJOR

ACCOMPLISHMENTS (1991 - 1996) 19

F. HOW EPA’S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACT RESPONDS TO

ISSUES AND CHALLENGES FACED BY THE FIELD 22

V. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION 24

VI. CONCLUSION 28

REFERENCES 29

APPENDICES

A. SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ACT OF 1990 (P.L. 101-619)

B. MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COUNCIL

C. U.S. EPA ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONTACTS

D. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONTACTS IN STATE AGENCIES

E. MODEL STATE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION LEGISLATION

F. RESULTS OF STATUS SURVEY ON COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

PROGRAMS AT THE STATE LEVEL

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

a a a a a a a a a aa

aaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa

a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

a a a a a a aaa

aaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

a a a aaa

aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa

a a a aaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

iii
1

On November 16, 1990, the

President signed the

National Environmental

Education Act (P.L. 101-619) into

law. The Act renewed federal

commitment to environmental

education and recognized the need

to tackle complex environmental

challenges with a well educated and

trained citizenry that has the

knowledge, skills, and motivation to

make informed decisions and take

responsible actions to ensure environmental quality.

Congress placed the responsibility for implementing

the Act in the hands of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and established an

environmental education office within EPA to oversee

several major initiatives, including:

• a training program for education professionals

• an environmental education grants program

• an internship and fellowship program for

students and teachers

• an environmental education awards program

• a federal task force and a national advisory

council

This report to Congress, prepared by the National

Environmental Education Advisory Council with

assistance from the North American Association

for Environmental Education (NAAEE), has three

main objectives:

• To describe the current status of

environmental education in the

United States

• To update Congress on EPA’s

progress in implementing the

National Environmental

Education Act

• To offer specific recommendations

for strengthening environmental

education at national, state, and

local levels

The Council gathered information for this report from

a variety of existing sources, including national and

state surveys, professional and popular literature,

and interviews with more than 30 researchers,

educators, and other professionals working in

environmental education and related fields. The

Federal Task Force on Environmental Education

provided comments. Public notices in the Federal

Register generated additional input from individuals

and organizations representing educational and

environmental interests. However, no new research

was conducted for this report.

Key terms used throughout this report are defined in

the box below. For additional information concerning

this report, please contact:

Kathleen MacKinnon

EPA Environmental Education Division

Phone: (202) 260-4951

E-mail: mackinnon.kathleen@epamail.epa.gov

I. INTRODUCTION

Key Terms Used in This Report

Environmental Education: a learning

process that increases people’s knowledge

and awareness about the environment and

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

Formal Education: education involving

the formal school system—includes

programs and activities taking place in

public and private preschools, elementary

schools, middle schools, secondary schools,

colleges, and universities

Nonformal Education: education that

takes place outside the formal school

system—includes programs and activities

taking place in museums, nature centers,

zoos, aquariums, community clubs, science

centers, and other community educational

institutions and organizations; also includes

television, radio, newspapers, and other

media-generated educational programs

Pre-Service Training or Pre-Professional

Education: training that takes place at

colleges and universities before students

are certified to teach; can also include preprofessional education for students studying

to be park naturalists, zoo educators, and

other educators working in nonformal

educational settings and institutions

In-Service Training or Professional

Development: training that takes place after

teachers are in the classroom; can also

include professional development for

nonformal educators working in zoos,

museums, nature centers, and other

nonformal educational settings and institutions
2

Environmental education is a

learning process that

increases people’s knowledge

and awareness about the

environment and 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). Environmental

education enhances critical thinking,

problem solving, and effective decision-making skills

and enables individuals to weigh various sides of an

environmental issue to make informed and

responsible decisions (Federal Register, 1996).

A. GOALS, GUIDING PRINCIPLES,

AND DEFINITIONS

To help clarify the relationship between knowledge,

skills, and action, educators have developed a

framework and set of goal levels that stress a

hierarchical approach to environmental literacy.

GOAL LEVELS

• Ecological concepts: Provides

knowledge to make ecologically

sound environmental decisions

• Conceptual awareness: Develops

awareness of how individual and

collective behaviors influence the

quality of life and the quality of the

environment

• Issue investigation and evaluation: Develops the

knowledge and skills to investigate

environmental issues and evaluate solutions for

remediating them

• Environmental action skills: Develops skills for

taking positive actions to help resolve

environmental issues (Hungerford, et al., 1980)

Research findings indicate that in order for individuals

and groups to make informed decisions and take

responsible actions regarding the environment, they

need to be thoroughly exposed to all four goal levels—

not just the first two. Findings also indicate that the

quality of environmental actions tends to improve when

people have learned and used issue analysis and

investigation skills (Hungerford, et al., 1980).

B. NEED AND RELEVANCE TO

AMERICANS’ EVERYDAY

LIVES

All members of society depend on natural resources

to survive. The availability of these resources has

limits. It is essential, therefore, that the public

understand the importance of the environment to

their quality of life and that they have the knowledge,

tools, and ethic to live in ways that minimize the

impact of their actions on the environment. In short,

to live sustainably. Environmental education

provides the public with the knowledge, tools, and

ethic to enable them to make informed and

responsible decisions to live sustainably.

PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT

The public is concerned about environmental quality.

Several public opinion polls conducted in the past

II. WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND

WHY DO WE NEED IT?

Components of

Environmental Education

The Tbilisi Declaration, adopted by acclamation at the

world’s first intergovernmental conference on environmental education, outlined five categories of objectives for

environmental education:

1) Awareness and sensitivity to the environment and

environmental challenges

2) Knowledge and understanding of the environment and

environmental challenges

3) Attitudes of concern for the environment and a

motivation to improve or maintain environmental quality

4) Skills to identify and help resolve environmental

challenges

5) Participation in activities that lead to the resolution of

environmental challenges

(UNESCO, 1978)
3

five years demonstrate that U.S. citizens are worried

about air and water quality, support an expanded

federal role in environmental protection, and are

concerned about the links between health and

environment (Harris, Tarrance, and Lake, 1989). For

example, a 1994 public opinion poll conducted for the

National Wildlife Federation indicated that despite

concern about crime, the economy, and health care,

voters do not want to roll back environmental

protection and are especially concerned about clean

water, pesticide contamination, and other issues

related to human health and the environment. More

than 40 percent of those polled felt that current laws

and regulations do not go far enough in protecting

the environment, which supports earlier surveys that

found that environmental concerns are “urgent” and

need to be addressed (Hart, 1994).

The environment also is consistently ranked by

young people as “one of the most important” issues

facing the planet. In a 1994 survey conducted for the

National Environmental Education and Training

Foundation, students from non-disadvantaged

socioeconomic areas ranked concern about the

environment second (51 percent)—after concern

about AIDS (64 percent)—as the “problem they are

most concerned about and want to improve.” Other

issues that were of concern to those students included

kidnaping, guns, the economy, and neighborhood

crime and violence. While students from

disadvantaged areas cited less concern for the

environment (43 percent)—behind AIDS, kidnaping,

guns, neighborhood crime and violence, and the

economy—concern for the environment was

nevertheless significant (Roper, 1994). In another

survey conducted for World Wildlife Fund, teens

ranked the environment as “one of the most serious

problems society will face in the year 2000” (Hart,

1994). The data from these and other surveys also

indicated that environmental education programs

have an important role to play in the development of

sound and effective environmental practices.

THE PUBLIC’S ABILITY TO RESPOND

Although much of the survey data demonstrates

public concern about the environment, concern by

itself does not necessarily indicate that individuals

are taking appropriate actions to ensure

environmental protection. Results of a 1991 poll

released by The Wall Street Journal showed that 80

percent of Americans call themselves

environmentalists, yet in that same poll, nearly 55

percent could not recall a single instance during the

past six months when they bought one product

instead of another for environmental concerns (Wall

Street Journal, 1991).

The need for education about theenvironment has been evidenced in

oratory and print over the past century,

and has increased in volume and intensity

since Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring

was published in 1962. Silent Spring is

frequently identified as the catalyst for the

environmental movement of the 1960s

and 1970s, which differs from earlier

conservation movements because it “. . .

was far more widespread and popular,

involving public values that stressed the

quality of the human experience and

hence of the human environment.”

In the movement’s early days a variety of

federal and state laws were enacted to

address public concerns. Prominent

among them were the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-

190) and the National Environmental

Education Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-516), both

of which identified education as a

Looking Back: The Historical Roots of Environmental Education

mechanism for improving the quality of the

human environment. The National

Environmental Education Act of 1990 (P.L.

101-619) is a restatement of that goal.

Environmental education has as its roots

the varied and century-old fields of nature

study, outdoor education, and conservation

education. Since the 1970s, environmental

education has been characterized by the

development of implicit and explicit

interconnections with science, technology,

and the issues and problems of society.

Environmental education has been defined

and redefined over the last twenty-five

years. Definitional issues are inherent in a

field this broad and encompassing. It is

generally agreed that environmental

education is a process that creates

awareness and understanding of the

relationship between humans and their

many environments—natural, man-made,

cultural, and technological. Environmental

education is concerned with knowledge,

values, and attitudes, and has as its aim

responsible environmental behavior.

The most commonly accepted definition

worldwide was developed in 1975 at a

United Nations Educational, Scientific,

and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

meeting in Belgrade, Yugoslavia. This

definition and its guiding principles were

accepted by the twelve federal agencies

that participated in a 1993 interagency

review of federal environmental education

programs. A report of this interagency

group states that “environmental

education should increase public

awareness and knowledge about

environmental issues as well as provide

the public with the skills necessary to

make informed decisions and the

motivation to take responsible actions”

(FCCSET, 1993).
4

In September 1993, a federal government interagency

working group on environmental education and

training concluded that:

“. . . the actual level of public understanding about the

basic scientific concepts that explain and offer solutions to

environmental threats such as those posed by global change

and wetlands destruction remains limited. Without

sufficient knowledge and training, the public may wish to

respond to an environmental challenge, but may not be able

to do so effectively because they lack sufficient scientific

understanding of the problem.”

The working group further concluded that:

“Environmental education and training can help bridge

the gap between the public’s heightened awareness of and

interest in protecting the environment and their need to

become more knowledgeable about the scientific concepts

that will enable them to more effectively respond to their

concerns.” (FCCSET, 1993)

DEMAND FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

Recent surveys indicate that there is solid support at

local and state levels from educators, parents, and

students. In a 1993 survey of science and social

studies educators and nonformal educators working

in zoos, museums, nature centers, and aquariums,

more than 90 percent of the more than 2,000

educators who responded indicated that

environmental education should be a priority in

schools and nonformal institutions. In that same

survey, educators indicated a need for more materials,

training, and institutional commitment for

environmental education (WWF, 1993).

Many state and national organizations and state and

federal agencies also have been inundated with

requests for environmental education materials,

training, and support. For example, during the past

five years, EPA’s Environmental Education Division

received approximately 10,000 grant proposals

requesting approximately $300 million. During this

period, Congress appropriated approximately $13

million for this program allowing EPA to support

only approximately 1,200 projects. As another

example, through a grant from EPA, the University of

Michigan established and maintains an electronic

system, called “EE-Link,” designed to increase the

ability of educators and other users to gain access to

the wealth of environmental education information

and materials that exist in various databases linked

through the Internet. The University of Michigan

reports that since “EE-Link” was established in 1993,

public interest and access to Internet accessible

databases and materials through “EE-Link” has

grown considerably. By June 1996, for example, the

University of Michigan reported receiving

approximately 640,000 “hits” over a three month

period (or an average access rate of nearly 50,000 per

week) on “EE-Link” showing the significant interest

for this type of information (NAAEE, 1996).

In nonformal surveys, local and state institutions

indicate that they do not have the staff or resources to

respond to increasing requests for environmental

education materials and training. And in a 1994

survey of parents in Minnesota, researchers found

that more than 60 percent of parents surveyed

considered the environment to be one of the very

important skills for high school graduates (compared

to 43 percent for geography, 54 percent for

government, 58 percent for science, 43 percent for

history, and 19 percent for fine arts) (Simmons, 1995).

WHY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IS

RELEVANT TO AMERICANS’ EVERYDAY LIVES

Environmental education is relevant to our everyday

lives because it can ensure the health and welfare of

our nation by:

• protecting human health

• advancing quality education

• expanding employment opportunities

• promoting sustainable development

• protecting America’s natural heritage

Protecting Human Health

The link between environmental challenges and

human health is a major cause for public concern

about the environment. Lead poisoning in paint and

pipes, air pollution, pesticides in water and food

supplies, increased threats of skin cancer from

depletion of the ozone layer, and related

environmental challenges are of growing concern to

an increasing number of Americans. The public is

especially concerned about the effects of these

problems on their children and future generations.

Environmental education helps prevent or mitigate

environmental human health problems by providing

the public with information on how individual and

collective actions lead to environmental pollution,

how pollutants may affect one’s health, how to

assess real versus exaggerated environmental health

risks, and how to make informed and responsible

decisions that prevent or mitigate the effects of

pollution on one’s health.
5

Advancing Quality Education

Educators and public officials generally believe that

significant improvements are needed in the nation’s

public education system to enhance student learning

(National Commission on Excellence in Education,

1983). Many educational scholars and practitioners

agree that “. . . our students are not doing well at

thinking, reasoning, analyzing, predicting,

estimating, or problem solving . . .” (Kennedy, 1991).

Many goals of the education reform movement

emphasize the importance of strengthening core

subjects such as math, science, and geography as well

as teaching in an interdisciplinary manner across

subject areas. Education reformers are also looking

for ways to improve student learning through greater

use and development of critical-thinking and

problem-solving skills. Finally, many reformers

emphasize the importance of relating learning in the

classroom to the needs and issues of the community.

Environmental education has tremendous potential

for contributing to the goals of the education reform

movement. For example, environmental education

provides an opportunity to strengthen teaching in

many core subjects, especially science, because it is

the basis for solving many of our environmental

challenges. Environmental education also provides

an opportunity to strengthen interdisciplinary

teaching because environmental topics can be

addressed from many different perspectives,

including scientific, historical, cultural, and political

perspectives. Finally, environmental education can

provide an important opportunity for teachers to

bring actual local environmental challenges into the

classroom for discussion and problem-solving.

In fact, a 1993 federal interagency report on

environmental education and training, concluded

that:

“. . . infusing environmental education into all subject

areas can lead to overall improvements in the educational

system, including improvements in teaching the core

subjects.”

The report also noted that:

“Understanding the complexities of the interrelationships

between the natural environment and human activity—

economic, social, and political—is a necessary condition to

the maintenance and improvement of environmental

quality. Because a goal of environmental education is the

fostering of responsible environmental behavior,

environmental education necessitates emphasis on higherorder thinking and learning skills. By setting a goal of

fostering changes in environmental behavior,

environmental educators stress the development of skills

that enable students to synthesize and evaluate data from

across the spectrum of human knowledge and to develop

solutions that are scientifically, economically, and

politically sound.” (FCCSET, 1993)

Expanding Employment Opportunities

Protecting the environment has the added value of

creating new jobs for Americans. Employment

opportunities cover the spectrum of careers, from

manual labor to high technology and management.

For example, there is an increasing demand for

individuals with specialized scientific and technical

skills to develop more effective environmental

pollution prevention and control technologies.

There is also a growing demand for trained workers

in environmentally related fields. Projected revenues

(1992-1997) show consistent growth for

environmental industries such as air pollution

control, environmental energy sources, hazardous

waste management, resource recovery, and

instrument manufacturing. The Environmental

Business Journal reports a composite annual growth

rate of 6 percent for these industries. This growth is

also reflected in employment forecasts into the next

century.

Environmental education and training can help

ensure an adequate supply of well-trained

environmental personnel to deal with the nation’s

increasingly complex environmental challenges.

Environmental education also improves the quality of

the general work force. Environmental education’s

emphasis on critical thinking and problem-solving

better equips students to deal with rapidly changing

technologies in the workplace. And environmental

education opens new opportunities as the United

States exports its environmental skills and

technologies to other nations.

Promoting Sustainable Development

The future health and welfare of our nation depends

on our ability to use the Earth’s resources sustainably.

The United Nations World Commission on

Environment and Development defines sustainable

development as “development that meets the needs of

the present without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own needs.” It is critical that

we provide future generations of Americans with the

same abilities and opportunities that current and past

generations have had.

In 1992, international leaders came together in Rio de

Janeiro to participate in the United Nations
6

Conference on Environment and Development

(UNCED). The product of UNCED, Agenda 21,

provides guidance to countries so they can meet their

own environmental and development goals. The U.S.

response to Agenda 21 is the President’s Council on

Sustainable Development (PCSD). The PCSD report,

Sustainable America: A New Consensus for Prosperity,

Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment for the Future,

is a series of policy recommendations which will help

the U.S. achieve national environmental, economic,

and social goals. Like Chapter 36 in Agenda 21,

Chapter 3 in Sustainable America focuses on the role of

education in sustainability. The recommendations

and actions in Chapter 3 have been supplemented

with initiatives in another document titled Education

for Sustainability: An Agenda for Action. Together these

reports highlight the important role of education in

ensuring a sustainable future.

Sustainable development poses two fundamental

education challenges: one is to promote positive

attitudes and informed decisions of citizens and

government leaders that are conducive to

sustainability. The other is to teach people at all

levels the benefits of integrating conservation

priorities with the need for development.

Environmental education has the potential to make a

major contribution to sustainable development by

demonstrating ways to overcome these two

challenges. First, environmental education research

has identified key strategies for developing education

programs that lead to responsible decision-making

and action. Second, environmental education

practitioners have developed program models for

incorporating a range of perspectives into the

resolution of issues. These tools and strategies,

developed over decades by environmental educators

and field tested on a range of issues where conflicts

exist between different interest groups, can be applied

immediately to sustainable development.

Protecting America’s Natural Heritage

Interest in protecting America’s natural heritage

arises from the respect that most Americans hold for

the nation’s past and a belief in its future. It also

stems from a desire to protect our natural areas and

scenic landscapes, to enjoy them, and to pass them on

to our children.

America’s natural heritage also includes the

multitude of plant and animal species that inhabit

our country. State and privately funded efforts to

protect and manage species and their habitats reflect

Americans’ love for wildlife. Yet many citizens do

not understand the ecological and economic

importance of preserving biological diversity and that

species can be strong indicators of the health of the

environment. Environmental education enhances the

public’s understanding of the need for biodiversity.

Environmental education also educates the public

about how their actions affect natural ecosystems and

how positive steps taken to minimize impacts on

these ecosystems will translate into improvements in

our overall environment.
7

Environmental education is

taking place across the

country—in classrooms and

board rooms, in living rooms and

urban education centers, in city halls

and congressional chambers. How is

it being done and who is doing it?

What obstacles must we overcome to

ensure that all citizens have the

knowledge, skills, and attitudes to

make informed decisions about the

environment? What do professionals

face in trying to create an

environmentally literate citizenry? This section

provides an overview of environmental education in

the United States—its status, current approaches,

audiences targeted, and critical issues facing the field.

A. APPROACHES AND AUDIENCES

Since 1970, a variety of educational institutions,

environmental organizations, and government

agencies have supported the development, delivery,

and evaluation of environmental education in the

United States. These environmental education efforts

have targeted a variety of audiences, including

teachers and students in elementary and secondary

education, administrators at all levels, college and

university teachers and students, adults and the

general public, senior citizens, multi-ethnic

communities, and political and business leaders.

In general, current environmental

education efforts generally fit into one

of two sectors:

• Formal environmental education,

which consists of activities taking

place in elementary and

secondary schools, colleges,

universities, and technical

institutions

• Nonformal environmental

education, which includes

activities taking place in

businesses, nonprofit organizations, and other

institutions that are not considered part of the formal

education system, also encompasses activities that

involve the media, including newspapers, magazines,

television, and computer networks

Within each of these broad sectors, there are several

sub-sectors that encompass the majority of

environmental education activities taking place today.

Collaboration between formal and nonformal sectors is

common and widespread, from local nature centers

working with school systems to federal agencies

working with businesses and universities. Such

collaboration is essential and it increases the reach and

impact of environmental education programs.

III. STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

IN THE UNITED STATES

Environmental Education Guidelines

Environmental education . . .

• Considers the environment in its totality

• Is a continuous lifelong process

• Embraces interdisciplinary education

• Examines major environmental issues from local, regional, national, and international points of view

• Focuses on current and potential environmental situations, remembering historical perspectives

• Promotes the value and necessity of local, national, and international cooperation

• Explicitly considers environmental aspects in plans for development and growth

• Acknowledges that learners have a role in planning learning and an opportunity for making decisions

and accepting their consequences

• Emphasizes environmental sensitivity, knowledge, problem-solving skills, and values clarification at every age

• Helps learners discover the symptoms and real causes of environmental challenges

• Emphasizes the complexity of problems

• Uses a diversity of experiences and approaches (UNESCO, 1978)
8

FORMAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

Formal environmental education efforts focus on

developing awareness, knowledge, skills, and

motivation in students, teachers, and school

administrators. Activities involve curriculum

development; teacher and administrator training

initiatives; local, state, and national school reform

activities; evaluation; the development of national

environmental education guidelines; and other related

programs designed to improve elementary, secondary,

and post-secondary education. This report divides the

formal sector into activities for grades kindergarten

through 12 (K-12) and post-secondary education

activities. However, there is overlap between the two,

especially in regard to teacher training and curriculum

development.

K-12 Environmental Education Activities

Delivery of environmental education programs in K12 education generally takes two approaches, with

many school systems adopting some combination of

the two. The most prevalent trend in elementary and

secondary education is toward an approach called

“infusion.” This approach integrates environmental

education into existing lessons, units, or topics

focusing on other subjects such as history, science,

and the social sciences. For example, students may

learn how to solve a local environmental challenge—

such as chemical contamination of a nearby stream—

using scientific methods that include testing,

identifying, and locating the source of contamination.

Students may also learn how to solve this

contamination problem by exploring historical

dimensions for how this type of problem has been

addressed in other communities, how governmental

agencies can help, and how citizens can get involved.

Ideally, infusion results in the incorporation of

environmental education—an inherently

interdisciplinary field—into all aspects of the

curriculum at every grade level. Infusion recognizes

that environmental issues cut across disciplinary

lines, and that environmental responsibility relies on

knowledge, skills, and attitudes that incorporate, but

also go beyond, basic scientific understanding.

Because no one asks schools to do less—in fact, many

demand they do more—infusion is a pragmatic

approach to ensuring that environmental education

can be incorporated into a crowded curriculum. But

despite the arguments in favor of infusion, many

environmental educators are wary. Their concern is

that environmental education may be short-changed

or ignored unless it receives its own place in the

curriculum. For this reason, many educators prefer

the “second-course” or “block” approach. This

approach consists of offering separate and distinct

“environmental” courses. Their argument is that the

separate course approach can offer depth that is

missing in the infusion approach, as well as an

identifiable focus for attracting funding, evaluating

progress, and encouraging career development.

According to recent data, most states rely on infusion

as the main approach for integrating environmental

education into the curriculum. However, more

distinct environmental courses are being offered in

middle and secondary schools, and many educators

believe that this trend will continue. In addition,

more schools are offering current events classes that

include an environmental focus (Marshall, 1987 and

NCEET, 1994).

The debate on how to incorporate environmental

education continues. The Council believes that both

these approaches should complement one another

and that efforts to choose an approach should be

based on state, local, and individual priorities, needs,

and training.

Post-Secondary Environmental Education Activities

At the college and university level, environmental

education is addressed in a variety of ways; however,

the effectiveness of these efforts varies from state to

state, institution to institution, and course to course,

just as it does at the K-12 level. In general,

universities and colleges emphasize the following

strategies to help create environmentally literate

citizens:

• Preparing Students for Environmentally Related

Careers: Courses and programs are offered that

prepare students for specific environmental

careers, including environmental science, natural

resource management, environmental design,

environmental engineering, environmental

planning, and environmental management.

Many universities and colleges also offer degrees

in environmental studies, which differ from more

technical programs in that they are

interdisciplinary and include both the natural

sciences (such as biology, resource management,

Environmental Education in the Schools

In 1995, three states had mandates requiring environmental

education training for teachers. In addition, eleven states

required environmental education to be incorporated into core

curricula.
9

and biochemistry) and the social sciences

(political science, economics, and history). A

relatively small number of universities and

colleges offer undergraduate and graduate

degrees in environmental education, which are

designed to train students for careers as

professional environmental educators working in

formal and nonformal settings.

• Providing Teachers with Pre-Service

Environmental Education Training: These

programs vary widely across the country. Some

areas have very limited opportunities for student

teachers to receive training in environmental

education before they enter the classroom. On the

other hand, some states, such as Wisconsin, have

mandates requiring nearly all students training

to become teachers to achieve environmental

education competencies before being licensed to

teach. In some institutions, students can take a

specific environmental education or

environmental studies course. In others, they

receive environmental education content and

methodologies through other courses—often in

science or general methodology classes.

Unfortunately, most environmental education

training for teachers takes place after they leave

the university and start teaching—as a result of

in-service training or individual teacher

initiative.

• Providing Environmental Education Training for

All University and College Students: There is a

growing trend among universities to include

environmental education requirements for all

students—not just those majoring in

environmentally related fields. For example,

Tufts University initiated an Environmental

Literacy Institute for university professors from

around the world to help them incorporate

environmental education into all coursework,

from creative writing to politics to law. This

program was initiated in 1993 and has involved

more than 150 universities and organizations

from around the world. In addition, more than

250 universities and organizations have become

signatories to the Talloires Declaration, which

supports an interdisciplinary approach to

environmental literacy at the university level.

• Providing Environmental Education Training for

Students Majoring in Business: Another trend is

the emergence of environmental management

education in business schools across the country.

Several business schools are currently

incorporating environmental content into their

curriculum, hoping to influence the attitudes and

behavior of current and future business

graduates regarding the link between a healthy

economy and a healthy environment. One

example is the Kellogg Graduate School of

Management, which has been offering a course

on environmental management since 1992 and is

integrating environmental issues into the Kellogg

curriculum. There also is a pilot program being

sponsored by the Management Institute for

Environment and Business, with support from

EPA, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Summit

Foundation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, General

Electric, Phillips Petroleum, Molten Metal

Technology, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and

American Telegraph and Telephone Company.

Environmental business and management

programs are operating at Stanford University,

the University of Virginia, the University of

Texas, the University of Michigan, and

Northwestern University.

• Conducting Research and Evaluation:

Universities and colleges have taken the lead in

conducting a broad spectrum of environmental

education research projects concerning

environmental knowledge, skills, attitudes, and

action. Findings have been published in a variety

of periodicals, such as The Journal of

Environmental Education and in conference

proceedings and monographs such as those

produced by the North American Association for

Environmental Education (NAAEE). Through

NAAEE’s North American Commission on

Environmental Education Research, faculty from

nearly 20 universities, including Rutgers

University, Ohio State University, the University

The Tufts University Model

Tufts Environmental Literacy Institute (TELI) is one of the

nation’s first comprehensive university environmental education

program integrating environmental issues into undergraduate,

graduate, and professional school curricula. TELI is a facultybased program aimed at enabling Tufts faculty across all

disciplines to incorporate environmental perspectives into the

courses they teach. The goal is to provide Tufts students with

broad and continuing exposure to environmental issues.

TELI’s faculty-development program offers workshops,

seminars, and meetings; financial and intellectual support; and

access to resources, information, and environmental experts.

Faculty members from other universities have attended parts

of TELI’s program to help them transfer this model to their

universities.
10

of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, and Northern Illinois

University, have cooperated in identifying and

addressing research needs in environmental

education.

• Environmental Career Training: Community

and technical colleges have become increasingly

active in providing training programs in the

environmental field, offering specific degree

programs for such careers as water/wastewater

technicians and course offerings on a variety of

specific topics. At present, these programs focus

mainly on technical aspects of job performance

and regulatory compliance, but the opportunity

exists for a broader environmental education

approach that also encompasses the nature of the

environmental challenges that prompted the need

for regulation. Community colleges, in particular,

provide a substantial resource for minority

students, many of which graduate and attend

universities for advanced degrees.

Links Between K-12 And Post-Secondary

Environmental Education

A variety of environmental education activities taking

place in the formal sector involve collaboration

between university and college programs and the

nation’s elementary and secondary schools. They also

involve collaboration with nonformal institutions,

government agencies, and other institutions. For

example, many universities and colleges are involved

in developing environmental education curriculum for

K-12, enhancing in-service training, and evaluating

environmental education curriculum materials and

training. And many nonprofit organizations, such as

environmental organizations and community

educational institutions, are involved in training

teachers, developing supplementary environmental

education materials, and conducting programs for

parents, families, youth, and the public.

NONFORMAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

Nonformal environmental education activities take

place in a variety of settings throughout the country—

from zoos, museums, aquariums, nature centers, and

science centers to parks, and community centers.

Nonformal environmental education programs often

complement and enhance formal education

programs. In addition, many target adults, the

general public, or families. And some are designed

for specific adult audiences, such as senior citizens,

public policy makers, business leaders, and women’s

groups.

The goals of nonformal environmental education

programs are similar to those in the formal sector—

developing environmentally literate young people

and adults who have the knowledge, skills, and

motivation to make informed decisions about the

environment. Activities in this sector involve

community action projects sponsored by business

and nonformal education organizations; programs in

local, state, and national parks, wildlife refuges, and

other natural areas; television, radio, and other media

programs focused on environmental issues and

actions; and a variety of partnership programs

designed to improve elementary, secondary, and

post-secondary education. In many cases, nonformal

environmental education activities are directed

toward the solution of specific environmental

challenges.

It should be recognized that in reaching adults, there

is a potentially strong link between formal and

nonformal education. Parents’ awareness and

understanding of environmental issues are

frequently enhanced by their children’s involvement

in environmental education. As children become

involved in the problem solving and action elements

of effective environmental education, they frequently

take these issues home and involve their parents in

discussions about them.

One of the central challenges to nonformal

environmental education is how best to reach a noncaptive, out-of-school audience with a meaningful

and effective program. What kind of education

program will prompt behavior change or

commitment to get involved in local, national, and

global environmental issues? To address this

problem, environmental education efforts in the

nonformal sector vary widely. Following is an

overview of the approaches currently in use around

the nation:

• Using the Media: Newspapers, magazines,

television, movies, and other media can transmit

messages to large audiences, and have been

gaining popularity as a means for educating the

public about environmental issues. There are

many excellent examples of media-based

environmental education, such as attempts to

educate about recycling; however, media efforts

face two major challenges. The first is assuring

that environmental messages publicized as

education really are education rather than hype

or propaganda. The second challenge is

assuring breadth and depth in examining

complex environmental issues. Entertainment

and the media often emphasize environmental

awareness, rather than education that leads to
11

personal, organizational, or community

participation.

Note: Many experts feel that the media is different

enough from other nonformal education activities that

it deserves its own sector. These educators divide

environmental education in three sectors: formal,

nonformal, and informal, with informal

environmental education encompassing mediagenerated environmental education programming.

• Targeting Specific Audiences: Many nonformal

institutions are involved in programs and

activities that target specific audiences such as

senior citizens, culturally diverse students and

adults, preschoolers, tourists, policy makers, and

most often, the general public. In some

communities, schools, businesses, and nonformal

institutions collaborate to reach a specific target

audience. Many community institutions offer

continuing education programs for adults and

families focusing on environmental topics, as

well as after-school, summer, and weekend

environmental education programs for young

people. In addition, some churches, synagogues,

and other religious institutions are involved in

environmental education activities that link

religion with environmental stewardship.

• Developing Supplementary Materials: Many

organizations and institutions, from government

agencies to environmental nonprofit

organizations and businesses, have developed

supplementary environmental education materials

that are used in schools and community settings.

These materials include a wide range of topics and

approaches, from those dealing with a single

subject such as solid waste to those focusing on

broad environmental themes such as sustainable

development. Some are meant to supplement

formal school curricula. Others are meant to be

used with students and adults in nonformal

settings. The quality of these supplementary

materials varies greatly.

• Training Educators: Many K-12 educators

receive environmental education training as a

result of in-service training that takes place after

they begin teaching. Much of this training takes

place through workshops at national, regional, or

state environmental education conferences, or

courses sponsored by local university outreach

and extension programs, often in conjunction

with nonformal partners, such as museums, zoos,

or science centers. Many teachers also participate

in specialized workshops, such as those offered

by Project Learning Tree, World Resources

Institute, World Wildlife Fund, and other

nonprofit educational organizations. These

courses and workshops often provide

“continuing education units” or specific college

credits that many teachers need to maintain

certification to teach.

B. WHO DELIVERS ENVIRONMENTAL

EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Many organizations, institutions, agencies, and

communities offer environmental education

programs. For the purposes of this report, we have

grouped the them into the following sectors:

• state, local, and tribal governments

• nongovernmental organizations

• universities, colleges, schools and technical

training institutes

• federal government

• business, industry, and the media

• foundations

The following discussion provides an overview of the

types of activities in each sector, including sample

program highlights to demonstrate the broad

spectrum of environmental education activities taking

place across the country.

STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS

State and local governments are influential forces

in formal environmental education because of their

responsibility for public education. In many states,

curricula are determined at the state level. In other

states, local governments or school districts play a

substantial role in curriculum development. State

and local funds are often used for teacher-training,

evaluation, and materials development. Tribal

governments often complement state and local

Council of State Governments

The Council of State Governments—a nonprofit, non-partisan

organization dedicated to serving all branches of state

government—developed a model for state environmental

education legislation. In July 1992, a specially-invited 40-

member subcommittee of the Council’s National Environment

Task Force met to draft the model. It was approved by the

Council’s full members of elected, appointed, and career state

government officials in 1993 and is being widely distributed to

state governments to serve as a model for future legislation.

See Appendix E.
12

efforts and play an important role in supporting

environmental education programs for Native

Americans.

During the 1970s, most state education agencies

appointed environmental education coordinators to

oversee efforts within the formal education system.

Coordinators were involved in developing state

guidelines, curriculum materials, and in-service

training programs. However, during the 1980s most

states followed the federal lead by deemphasizing

environmental education. As a result, the

responsibilities of full-time coordinators often shifted

to one or more individuals who were already

burdened with other responsibilities. During this

period, accomplishments related to environmental

education often reflected the interests of individuals

rather than a commitment from state or local

governments.

In the 1990s, there has been a reemergence of

environmental education as a state governmental

priority, as evidenced by the increasing numbers of

states with new legislative initiatives. In 1991, the

University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point began the

National Environmental Education Advancement

Project (NEEAP) to help teams of education and

environmental education leaders develop

comprehensive state environmental education

initiatives. In 1995-1996, NEEAP conducted a survey

of all 50 states allowing them to develop a state-bystate and composite picture of environmental

education programs. Results of this survey are

presented in Appendix F. NEEAP has been funded by

grants from the U.S. EPA, the National Fish and

Wildlife Foundation, and the National Wildlife

Federation, among others. Also in 1995, a State

Education and Environment Roundtable was

established to serve as a resource to state education

agencies working to integrate environmental education

into K-12 curriculum and schools’ educational reform

efforts. The Roundtable was established with funding

from the Pew Charitable Trusts and is administered by

the Council of Chief State School Officers.

Whether through state mandates, state agency efforts,

or some type of independent state associations, there

is a strong logic for building support for

environmental education on a systematic state-bystate basis that ultimately strengthens local program

efforts. For specific Council recommendations, please

see Section V, beginning on page 24.

NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have been

leaders in environmental education initiatives taking

place in the formal and nonformal sector since

environmental education began. In some cases,

educational activities are directed toward the solution

of specific environmental challenges or increasing

awareness about national or global issues such as

acid rain or ozone depletion. Many NGOs also are

involved in curriculum development, teacher

training, and evaluation. Programs take place at such

diverse sites as zoos, museums, wildlife refuges,

parks, and nature centers.

Wisconsin — Leading the Way

Wisconsin has been a leader in promoting environmental

education at the state level and was recognized by Renew

America, Inc. for having the outstanding state environmental

education program in the nation. In 1990, the state passed

environmental education legislation that created a cooperative

program among several state agencies. The program

includes a state coordinating board, a grants program, state

centers, and a mandatory environmental literacy assessment

of students and teachers. Earlier legislation required every

school district to develop, implement, and evaluate a

sequential K-12 environmental education program. Wisconsin

state law also requires teacher training in environmental

education as a prerequisite for teacher licensing. Since 1985,

more than 30 states have enacted some type of legislative

initiative to enhance environmental education at the state level.

Native Americans — Promoting Literacy

and Technical Expertise

In many cases, Native American tribal governments are

responsible for implementing environmental regulations within

established tribal boundaries. Many tribes face a shortage of

technically trained professionals to manage their resources. A

number of tribes and Native American organizations have

developed programs to promote the environmental literacy

and technical expertise of their people.

For example, the nonprofit American Indian Science and

Engineering Society (AISES) is dedicated to increasing the

number of Native American scientists and engineers. It has

grown from a professional society to a major national resource

for Native American education that is recognized by the

National Science Foundation, the American Association for the

Advancement of Science, and more than 70 U.S.

corporations. Tribal leaders and educators across the country

are becoming increasingly aware of the environmental wisdom
13

During the 1980s, a number of trends in nonformal

environmental education emerged, which have

continued into the 1990s. These include an emphasis

on urban and rural environmental education,

interactive traveling exhibits focusing on

environmental issues, eco-tourism education

packages, and family and adult-oriented outdoor

education camps. These trends are expected to

continue, based on market demand, available leisure

time, and the spending power of Americans.

NGOs include a variety of organizations, from

nonprofit environmental groups, such as World

Wildlife Fund and the National Audubon Society, to

professional associations that include environmental

education activities, such as the North American

Association for Environmental Education, the New

England Environmental Education Alliance, the

National Science Teachers Association, and the

National Association for Interpretation. A growing

trend is the development of nongovernmental state

environmental education associations or councils

that provide an opportunity for strengthening state

capacity for effective environmental education.

Presently, 45 states have environmental education

associations (Ruskey and Wilke, 1996).

UNIVERSITIES, COLLEGES, SCHOOLS, AND

TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTES

As mentioned previously, formal educational

institutions are actively involved in all aspects of

environmental education, from in-service and preservice education to curriculum development and

professional development. Please see the section on

formal education, beginning on page 8.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Many federal agencies such as EPA, the Departments

of Education, Interior, Agriculture, Energy, and State,

the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA), the National Science

Foundation, and the Peace Corps have ongoing

environmental education programs tailored to the

missions of their respective agencies. Federal support

for environmental education includes teacher

training, grants to support state and local projects

and to promote equity and diversity across states, the

development and dissemination of educational

materials, as well as field and laboratory internship

programs. A 1993 federal interagency report noted

that federal environmental education programs can

help the government meet its broader goals for

supporting education reform; job creation, training,

and economic competitiveness; public health;

environmental protection; and sustainable

development (FCCSET, 1993).

With passage of the National Environmental

Education Act of 1990, EPA was charged with

facilitating communication and collaboration across

the federal government. This is accomplished, in

part, through the Federal Task Force on

Environmental Education which is chaired by EPA

(see page 20). Increasingly, federal agencies have

been working together to set program priorities by

serving on interagency advisory committees, review

panels, and strategic planning sessions. In addition,

federal agencies have been increasingly collaborating

on developing and implementing joint projects

through interagency agreements. For example, EPA

and the Department of Education worked together to

add a new priority to EPA’s Environmental

Education Grant Program which focuses on using

environmental education as a catalyst to advance

state and local education reform goals. In addition,

NASA, the Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Global

Change Research Program, EPA and others

developed the “Global Change Education State Team

Initiative” to improve literacy and teaching capability

in global change education among educators and

community leaders through statewide systemic

education approaches.

The Council believes strongly that the federal

government has an important role to play in

enhancing environmental education in the United

States. For an analysis of EPA’s implementation of

the National Environmental Education Act of 1990,

see page 19 in Section IV.

BUSINESS, INDUSTRY, AND THE MEDIA

Business and industry have become increasingly

involved in supporting environmental education

GLOBE

In 1994, the Vice President launched Global Learning and

Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE)—an

innovative international environmental education program

which coordinates the work of students, teachers, and

scientists to study and understand the global environment.

The GLOBE program also provides opportunities for students

to conduct valuable scientific work, immediately analyze the

results of their studies, utilize advanced technologies as an

integral part of their work, and have the opportunity to

communicate and learn from each other in the U.S. and

abroad. GLOBE’s federal partners include NOAA, NASA,

NSF, EPA, and the Departments of Education and State.
14

activities. Many companies have supported on-going

environmental education programs or started their

own to increase awareness about environmental

issues and to help consumers understand the links

between business and the environment.

Environmental messages are frequently appearing on

everything from bottled water to paper bags, and

advertisers are catering to “green” consumers by

featuring the environmental advantages of one

product over another. Amway, Chevron, Eastman

Kodak, Phillips Petroleum, and Shell Oil are just a few

examples of corporations that have conducted and

supported environmental education activities for

several years. Environmental programming is also a

regular feature on television, radio, video, computer

networks, and other media outlets. The nonprofit

Environmental Media Association (EMA) was

founded in 1989 to foster the rapidly growing

environmental interests of the entertainment industry.

EMA works with writers, producers, directors, and

others to incorporate environmental themes into film,

television, and music.

FOUNDATIONS

Over the past five years, private charitable

foundations have increased their funding for

environmental education. Some, like the Pew

Charitable Trusts, the Geraldine R. Dodge

Foundation, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, have

supported environmental education for many years.

Many foundation grants are typically for three years

or less, are usually limited to $100,000 per year, and

usually advance a single resource conservation

program within the foundation’s overall goals.

The two Congressionally-funded foundations in the

field, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

(NFWF) and the National Environmental Education

and Training Foundation (NEETF), are making

major contributions to environmental education.

The matching grants awarded by NFWF and NEETF

increase private support and partnerships for

environmental education. Unlike endowment-based

private foundations, these foundations are funded

by annual federal appropriations. The future impact

of NFWF and NEETF depends on continued support

from Congress and other funding partners.

The number of foundations funding environmental

projects is growing, and opportunities for

environmental education are good. To increase their

share of foundation support, the environmental

education community will need to build a stronger

connection between education and the

environmental improvement goals of philanthropic

foundations.

C. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

The National Environmental Education Act of 1990

begins with a recognition of the increasing

complexity and scope of environmental challenges

in the United States, and the importance of

environmental education in helping the nation meet

these environmental challenges. In the past several

decades, federal and state agencies;

nongovernmental organizations; educational

institutions; and others working at local, state, and

national levels have developed a wide variety of

effective environmental programs. Despite

innumerable program accomplishments, the field of

environmental education faces many challenges, as

summarized below. The Council has addressed

these issues with a series of short- and long-term

recommendations outlined in Section V of this

report. However, it is important to note that

environmental education is a long-term process that

requires on-going support and participation from all

sectors of society.

Issue

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IS NOT A

PRIORITY ACROSS THE COUNTRY

Despite the wealth of programs and materials,

widespread support and funding for environmental

education is often lacking. Environmental education

is not a clear priority at any level within our

education system or society, and many programs

face on-going resource, funding, and staff

limitations. In addition, many view environmental

education as an “add-on” and not part of

mainstream education. For these reasons, there

needs to be clear and consistent political and

legislative support at all levels.

1

Project Learning Tree —

A Model Involving Business and Industry

Project Learning Tree (PLT) is a K-12 environmental

education program sponsored by the American Forest

Foundation and the Council for Environmental Education. For

more than 20 years, PLT has worked with state agencies, the

U.S. Forest Service, the forest products industry, teachers,

school administrators, and other partners to provide

environmental education materials and programs throughout

North America. Many look to PLT as a model for involving

business and industry in the important task of educating

students and teachers about the environment.
15

Many experts agree that despite many exemplary

efforts, this lack of long-term consistent support and

commitment at all levels has created a field that is

often fragmented, inefficient, and duplicative. The

Council recognizes that the National Environmental

Education Act is a critical and needed step in

stimulating national support for environmental

education and a renewed federal commitment for

environmental education. However, much work still

needs to be done at national, state, and local levels to

institutionalize environmental education and make it

a nationwide priority.

Issue

STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL EFFORTS NEED

GREATER RESOURCES AND SUPPORT

Although consistent federal leadership and

commitment is critical to the success of

environmental education in the United States, most

environmental education initiatives are best

developed and implemented at the state, local, and

tribal levels. The federal government’s primary role

should be to support exemplary state, local, and

tribal initiatives that have evolved over the last two

decades. Federal support can help institutionalize

such programs and promote a sustainable

environmental education infrastructure that will

function despite shifts in spending priorities.

Many experts believe that the most effective way to

enhance state and local capacity to implement

effective programs is to support the development of

comprehensive state environmental education

programs that include statewide environmental

education offices, state coordinators, and state

coordinating councils. In some states, legislative

mandates are the most effective means of

institutionalizing environmental education efforts.

The Council of State Governments has developed

“Model State Environmental Education Legislation”

which can help states to explore this option (see

Appendix E). Alternative methods, including the

creation of independent state environmental

education councils or associations, that help serve as

focal points for federal, state, and local agencies, as

well as nonprofit organizations, business, and

industry, can also promote environmental education

on a statewide basis.

Issue

RESOURCES ARE LIMITED AND NO ONE

SECTOR CAN SUPPORT THE ENTIRE FIELD

Solutions to environmental issues require increased

collaboration among all sectors of society—including

business, industry, schools, community

organizations, citizens, funding institutions, and

government. In the past, the responsibility for

environmental education rested mainly with

nonprofit organizations, community educational

institutions, and motivated educators scattered

throughout the country. With the passage of the

National Environmental Education Act, there was

hope that the federal government would supply much

of the needed funding. But the federal government

cannot supply the amount of funding needed to

support the field; rather, it can help leverage support

from state, local, and private sources. Today, there

are more partnerships and a better understanding

that collaboration is the key to sustainability.

Although models exist in almost every state, we need

more partnerships that work—across federal

agencies, within EPA, among nonprofits, schools,

and business, and between the public and private

sectors. Specifically, business needs to get more

involved—especially in supporting local and state

environmental education efforts. Federal agencies

and like-minded organizations need to collaborate on

more projects of mutual interest to prevent waste and

duplication. Zoos, museums, nature centers, and

other community educational institutions need to

work more closely with the formal education system

and with parents and families.

There also is a need to build on existing international

partnerships. Environmental challenges are global

and will increasingly need international cooperation

to find effective solutions. It is critical that countries

establish and enhance mechanisms to share success

stories and lessons learned to improve national and

international environmental education efforts.

Issue

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS

AND NONFORMAL EDUCATORS NEEDS

GREATER SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT

Over the long term, one of the most cost-effective

efforts that can be undertaken to improve

environmental education in the United States is to

improve the quality of pre-service and in-service

teacher professional development, and training for

instructors in environmental education programs

outside the classroom (for example, with youth and

community groups, zoos and museums, and other

nonformal educational institutions). Although good

programs exist, most experts agree that teacher and

instructor training for environmental education is

inconsistently available. Teachers often express

misgivings about their competence to conduct

environmental education programs and have limited

opportunities for training before and after entering

3

4

2
16

the classroom. Although some states require

environmental education training, surveys indicate

a notable lack of emphasis on environmental

education in pre-service teacher training, as well as

in-service instruction.

Issue

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION IS NOT WELL

INTEGRATED INTO EDUCATION REFORM AND

IMPROVEMENT

Environmental education has the potential to

significantly improve the public education system.

Many of the goals championed by education reform

and improvement advocates—such as the need to

strengthen interdisciplinary teaching and criticalthinking and problem-solving skills—can be

effectively accomplished using environmental

education as a vehicle. Although there are some

good efforts under way, environmental education

has not consistently been well integrated into

education reform and improvement efforts across the

country and it has not generally been identified as a

priority of the formal education establishment. This

is partly a reflection of the environmental education

establishment’s tendency in the past to focus more on

reaching teachers and students rather than state

education agencies, local school boards, principals

and other school administrators. Consequently, key

educational decision makers are not generally

knowledgeable of the potential effectiveness of

environmental education in achieving many of the

basic goals of education reform.

Environmental education, by its nature, draws on

and impacts many disciplines, such as science, math,

history, and political science. It also is readily

identifiable as a critical component of citizenship

education, science literacy, career development, and

a variety of other initiatives supported by the

education reform movement. Education reform can

be a mechanism for giving environmental education

an established place in the curriculum, making it less

subject to funding priority shifts and more likely to be

a focus in teacher training.

Issue

IMPORTANT AUDIENCES ARE NOT

BEING REACHED

Most environmental education efforts have focused

on elementary and secondary students—especially

in kindergarten through the 6th grade—with some

support in community colleges, vocational

education, higher education and the Cooperative

Extension Service. Important audiences in

environmental education are being missed or

inadequately reached, such as adults, people of

color, low-income populations, and senior citizens.

In part, this is due to lack of materials, commitment

and organizational support; uncertainties in

knowing how to engage these audiences; and

difficulties in adapting traditional teaching strategies

to nonformal learning environments within

communities and diverse cultures. Environmental

education materials are rarely available in languages

other than English, although some have been

translated into Spanish, and such materials are not

always sensitive to diverse cultures.

Issue

EVALUATION, QUALITY ASSURANCE, AND

ACCESS TO MATERIALS AND INFORMATION

ON PROGRAMS IS LIMITED

What works in environmental education? What

types of training programs for teachers and

nonformal educators and which environmental

education materials are most effective and why?

What does it mean to be environmentally literate?

How do educators gain greater access to quality

materials? Where are the gaps in materials and

programs?

In general, environmental education programs have

not received rigorous evaluation to determine their

effectiveness. Several factors have contributed to this,

including limited funding to undertake short and longterm evaluations, difficulty in identifying quantitative

objectives, and the complexity of measuring long-term

educational changes. Experts agree that the field

needs more baseline data to evaluate current and

future environmental education efforts and to ensure

that the highest quality programs and projects are

funded and implemented. There is a need for research

on methods, materials, and effectiveness; evaluation

components for all programs and projects funded; and

the establishment of guidelines for program and

material evaluation.

In addition, the field has had limited resources to

develop nationally accepted guidelines to help

practitioners assess the value and effectiveness of

both formal and nonformal environmental education

methods, materials, and programs, as well as

nationally accepted learner outcomes to indicate

what a student should know when he or she

graduates from high school or national guidelines for

teacher training programs. To fill this need, the North

American Association for Environmental Education

(NAAEE) is currently working with EPA and a

variety of educational organizations and agencies

across the country to develop environmental

education guidelines that focus on three areas:

7

6

5
17

• materials development (completed

October 1996)

• learner outcomes (to be completed

September 1997)

• environmental educator competencies

(to be completed late 1998)

These guidelines will be consistent with guidelines

developed for major disciplines, especially with

science and geography guidelines. Access to high

quality environmental education materials and

programs varies from community to community, and

from state to state. In some cases, appropriate

materials and programs do not exist—especially for

specific audiences, such as urban educators, senior

citizens, adults, people of color, and culturallydiverse communities. In other cases, access to

existing materials and programs is limited because of

limitations in funding and “user-friendly”

mechanisms for finding out about new and existing

materials and programs.

Another related issue is the proliferation of materials

that are duplicative of existing curricula materials

and have ineffective implementation strategies. In

some cases, the problem for teachers is not access to

quality materials, but lack of training in how to

effectively use available materials. In other cases, the

problem is how to best evaluate and select the most

effective and educationally sound materials from the

many materials that exist.

Identifying existing gaps in current environmental

education materials and programs is another critical

issue. Many materials and programs emphasize

awareness, appreciation, and knowledge, without a

focus on skill development and commitment to

informed and responsible action. While it is critical

that all environmental education efforts have a sound

basis in science, there is a disproportionate emphasis

in formal education on science-oriented activities at

the expense of other subject areas such as geography

and civics. Most curriculum materials developed for

K-12 have a very limited topical focus, such as water

pollution, resource use/recycling, or energy.

Environmental education should be interdisciplinary,

with a focus on the learning process and not limited

to only one or two specific issues. Experts feel that

the field needs to develop a more balanced menu of

materials and programs that emphasize skill

development and citizen participation, and that

stress the interdisciplinary nature of environmental

issues.

Issue

MORE WELL-TRAINED ENVIRONMENTAL

PROFESSIONALS ARE NEEDED

To tackle current and future environmental

challenges, experts in the private and public sectors

agree that we need a better-trained cadre of

environmental professionals—from highly skilled

scientists and engineers to city planners and

technicians. The environmental work force is

especially lacking in representation from

communities of people of color.

Universities, community colleges, vocational schools,

and other training institutions need to offer more

training opportunities in environmental studies,

environmental design, environmental engineering,

environmental management, conservation biology,

and other related courses of study. At the same time,

environmental education should be infused into

traditional coursework to produce lawyers, business

leaders, and planners with the knowledge, skills, and

ethic to make informed and responsible decisions

about the environment. Unfortunately, many of

today’s courses lack the interdisciplinary ties that

link pure sciences with the social sciences.

Current efforts to provide environmental career

opportunities are limited—especially for people of

color and students with low incomes. Positive

partnerships, among businesses, nonprofits,

government, and schools, have increased the number

of internships, fellowships, and apprenticeship

programs available to students, but many more are

needed to meet current and future demands. The

challenge is to attract more bright, motivated students

to the field and to provide high-quality,

interdisciplinary education to all learners.

8
18

A. INTRODUCTION

In passing the National

Environmental Education Act of 1990

(P.L. 101-619), Congress was

responding to many of the issues and

challenges currently facing the field

of environmental education, such as

the need for improving access to

quality educational materials and

programs, increasing opportunities

for teacher education, reaching new

audiences, encouraging environmental careers, and

facilitating cooperation and partnerships as

discussed in Section III of this report. Since passage

of the Act, EPA has established an Environmental

Education Division (EED) within the Office of

Communications, Education, and Public Affairs

(OCEPA) to implement the Act. This chapter:

• Summarizes the major provisions of the Act

• Discusses EPA’s philosophy and approach to

implementing the Act and highlights the

Environmental Education Division’s major

accomplishments

• Discusses how EPA’s implementation of the Act

responds to many of the issues and challenges

facing the field as outlined in Section III

B. SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE

REQUIREMENTS

The Act directs EPA to:

• Establish an office of environmental education

within EPA with staff support in EPA

headquarters and the regions

• Award a grant to an institution of higher

education or a nonprofit organization (or a

consortia of such institutions) to operate an

Environmental Education and Training Program

to train education professionals

• Award grants to schools and universities, states

and local governments, and nonprofit

organizations to support their environmental

education programs

• Facilitate internships for college

students and fellowships for inservice teachers with agencies of

the federal government

• Provide national awards

recognizing outstanding

contributions to environmental

education for educators and

young people

• Establish a federal task force and

a national advisory council to

advise EPA on its

implementation of the Act

• Establish and support a National Environmental

Education and Training Foundation to encourage

private gifts to support environmental education

In 1990, Congress authorized appropriations of

between $12 and $14 million per year from FY 1992 -

FY 1996, for a total of $65 million over five years, to

implement the Act. To date, actual appropriations

have, however, been between $5.6 million and $7.8

million per year for the past six years, for a total of

$42.7 million. The Act specifies that 25 percent of

appropriated funds per year must be used to provide

administrative support for the office; 38 percent for

awarding grants; 25 percent for operating the training

program; 10 percent for supporting the Foundation;

and 2 percent for supporting a teacher awards

program administered by the Council on

Environmental Quality.

C. BACKGROUND ON ENVIRONMENTAL

EDUCATION AT EPA

Although EPA has historically focused on regulation,

enforcement, and cleanup to protect the environment,

it has also supported environmental education for

many years through various national initiatives and

regionally-based programs. For example, EPA has

developed and disseminated educational materials,

conducted teacher training workshops, and promoted

environmental careers through student internships.

With passage of the National Environmental

Education Act, for the first time in EPA’s history, the

Agency now has a Congressional mandate to

strengthen and expand environmental education as

an integral part of its mission to protect the

environment.

IV. IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

EDUCATION ACT OF 1990
19

EPA believes that environmental education is a

necessary ingredient to effective environmental

protection and can also be an effective vehicle for

teachers and others to advance education reform and

improvement. For example, learning about ways to

measure, analyze, and solve local environmental

challenges through “hands-on” environmental

science in the classroom can be an effective way to

strengthen efforts to improve math and science

education nationwide. “Sound science” is crucial to

protecting the environment as well as important to

meeting important goals for educational reform.

D. EPA’S ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

MISSION AND GOALS

The Council supports EPA’s mission statement,

which is “to advance and support environmental

education efforts to develop an environmentally

conscious and responsible public, and to inspire in

all individuals a sense of personal responsibility for

the care of the environment.”

EPA’s broad environmental education goals are to:

• Expand communication and partnerships

• Educate and motivate youth

• Promote the pursuit of environmental careers

• Develop an environmentally conscious and

responsible public

• Reach across international boundaries

EPA’s role in environmental education is to:

• Provide leadership

• Facilitate communication as well as information

and resource sharing

• Identify gaps

• Support the nation’s environmental education

efforts

• Act as an advocate for environmental education

nationally and internationally

E. OCEPA ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

DIVISION’S MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

(1991 - 1996)

AWARDING GRANTS

The Environmental Education Division and EPA’s

ten regional offices administer an annual

Environmental Education Grants Program to support

environmental education projects nationwide. From

1992 through 1996, EPA awarded approximately

1,200 grants worth approximately $13 million to

schools, state, local and tribal government agencies,

and nonprofit organizations and institutions such as

museums, environmental and community groups, and

nature centers. Individual grants were awarded for

up to $250,000, the vast majority of which were less

than $5,000 each.

Projects selected for funding educate students,

teachers, communities, and the general public about

issues such as air and water pollution, solid waste

management, as well as watershed and ecosystem

protection. Projects utilize educational approaches

that include workshop training, community

involvement, and curriculum development. Special

care has been given to ensure that the range of projects

selected for funding teach individuals problemsolving skills to enable them to make responsible

decisions that affect the environment, reach both

youths and adults from diverse communities and

regions around the country, and support EPA

priorities such as building state and local capacity,

advancing education reform, protecting human

health, and promoting environmental justice.

TRAINING EDUCATION PROFESSIONALS

EPA awards a cooperative agreement every three

years to support the development of a nationwide

environmental education and training program. The

purpose of this program is to train education

professionals, such as teachers, faculty, and state and

local education officials, to develop and deliver

quality environmental education programs. This

training program was initiated in 1992 with a threeyear cooperative agreement to a consortium of

universities and organizations headed by the

University of Michigan. Under this program, the

consortium supported K-12 in-service teacher training

by developing resource materials, establishing an

electronic database of information and education

materials, and conducting teacher training

workshops. In September 1995, EPA awarded this

cooperative agreement to a consortium headed by the

North American Association for Environmental

Education (NAAEE) to operate the second three-year

phase of this program. This phase includes and

builds upon work initiated by the University of

Michigan, and focuses on expanding existing quality

training efforts; evaluating and disseminating

information on “model” education materials and

programs; and strengthening partnerships and

networks of environmental education professionals.

EPA has made annual awards to support this

program ranging from $1.4 to $1.9 million, totaling

approximately $8.9 million.
20

ENCOURAGING ENVIRONMENTAL CAREERS

The Environmental Education Division administers

an internship program entitled the National Network

for Environmental Management Studies to encourage

post-secondary students in all academic disciplines

to pursue professional environmental careers. This

program provides students from more than 230

participating universities with the opportunity to

either work with environmental professionals at EPA

on a specific project or to conduct environmental

research directed by EPA at their university. Students

receive stipends for completing their projects. Since

1992, more than 450 students have participated in the

program. Out of a field of more than 1,000

organizations, this program was named “One of

America’s Top 100 Internships” in the Princeton

Review (1995 and 1996 editions). The Environmental

Education Division leverages resources from

participating EPA headquarters and regional offices

to finance this program.

The Environmental Education Division also

administers the Tribal Lands Environmental Science

Scholarship Program to encourage Native American

college students to pursue undergraduate and

graduate degrees in the environmental sciences. EPA

created this program to increase the number of Native

Americans trained in the environmental sciences and

employed by EPA to improve the environmental

protection of Indian lands. Since 1991, more than 223

students have received scholarships totaling nearly

$1 million to pursue environmental science degrees.

The Environmental Education Division leverages

resources from participating EPA offices to finance

this program.

The Environmental Education Division also

participates in various EPA and universitysponsored internship programs by placing postsecondary students in the Environmental Education

Division to work with its environmental

professionals. The Environmental Education

Division’s interns have included students from

American University, Stanford University, Howard

University, the University of Illinois, the University of

Maryland, the University of Rhode Island, the

University of the District of Columbia, and the

University of Vermont.

In 1992-1993, the Environmental Education Division

developed and administered a pilot fellowship

program to facilitate the placement of in-service

teachers in federal government agencies for year-long

environmental projects. Although interest in this

program has been high, personnel ceilings and

funding limitations have prevented full

implementation of the program. More than 200

applications were received. Of these, 24 teachers

were selected as fellowship finalists by their state

governors through the National Governors

Association and 10 were placed in positions with the

U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, the

Department of Energy, the Department of Defense,

and EPA.

HONORING DEDICATION TO THE

ENVIRONMENT

The Environmental Education Division administers

the President’s Environmental Youth Awards

program to encourage and honor young people for

their efforts to promote environmental awareness and

positive community involvement. Elementary and

high school students in all 50 states compete

annually in this program. Each year 10 national

award winners are selected by EPA’s 10 regional

offices for those projects that have produced the most

significant environmental gains, and the winners

receive national recognition from Washington, D.C.

Projects selected for national recognition have

addressed issues such as watershed cleanup and

restoration, energy conservation, and waste

management. The President and Vice President of the

United States and the EPA Administrator have

honored recipients of this awards program. More

than 250 national award winners have been honored

since EPA began administering this program in 1971.

The Environmental Education Division established

the National Environmental Education Awards

program to honor individuals for their outstanding

contributions to environmental education. The EPA

Administrator honors recipients of this awards

program every few years. The first awards were

presented to four outstanding individuals in the

spring of 1993. The awards commemorate Rachel

Carson for print, film, or broadcast media; Gifford

Pinchot for forestry and natural resources

management; Theodore Roosevelt for teaching; and

Henry David Thoreau for literature.

FACILITATING INFORMATION EXCHANGE

The Environmental Education Division has hosted or

supported various workshops and conferences to

expand communication, foster partnerships, and

solicit ideas about how the federal government can

best support the nation’s environmental education

efforts. For example, in cooperation with the Federal

Task Force on Environmental Education, the

Environmental Education Division sponsored a

national conference on environmental education in

November 1991. As follow-up to the national
21

conference, EPA’s regional offices in New England,

the Southwest, the Southeast, and the West, in

cooperation with other organizations, have held

several regionally-based workshops and conferences.

The Environmental Education Division also has

supported and participated in various environmental

education organizations’ conferences such as those

sponsored by the North American Association for

Environmental Education (NAAEE); the

Environmental Alliance for Senior Involvement; the

first Joint National Conference for Project Learning

Tree, Project Wild, and Project WET; the New England

Environmental Education Alliance; the Midwest

Environmental Education Association; and the

National Association for Interpretation.

IMPROVING COMMUNICATION AND

COORDINATION

The Environmental Education Division has

established the National Environmental Education

Advisory Council which links EPA with 11

environmental educators and supporters who

represent diverse geographic areas and minority

interests as well as schools and universities, nonprofit

organizations, states, the private sector, and senior

Americans. The Council reports to Congress on the

state of environmental education nationally,

nominates individuals for the National

Environmental Education Awards Program, and

advises the Environmental Education Division on

their overall goals, and on their grant and teacher

training programs. The Council has met one to two

times a year from 1992-1996.

The Environmental Education Division has established

the Federal Task Force on Environmental Education

which links EPA with numerous other federal agencies,

including the Departments of Education, Interior,

Agriculture, Energy, and Health and Human Services

as well as the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the

National Science Foundation. Headed by EPA, the

Task Force advises the Environmental Education

Division on specific topics, facilitates communication

across the federal government, and fosters interagency

collaboration on specific projects. The Task Force meets

periodically. The Environmental Education Division

also has operated an ongoing panel of federal agency

representatives to assist EPA in reviewing applications

and overseeing the implementation of the National

Environmental Education and Training Program under

Section 5 of the National Environmental Education Act.

The federal panel has met one to three times per year

from 1991-1995.

The Environmental Education Division also has

established the EPA Environmental Education

Advisory Board which links EPA’s headquarters and

regional offices and research laboratories across the

country. The Advisory Board facilitates

communication between EPA headquarters and

regional offices that conduct various national,

regional, and local education activities. These

activities include awarding grants, developing and

disseminating educational materials, conducting

teacher training, and promoting environmental

careers through student internships, research

fellowships, and course development. The Advisory

Board holds meetings and conference calls

approximately four times per year.

DEVELOPING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

PARTNERSHIPS

The Environmental Education Division supports the

efforts of the National Environmental Education and

Training Foundation to leverage public and private

sector resources for environmental education. The

Foundation is a nonprofit, philanthropic

organization established by Congress under the

National Environmental Education Act to

complement and expand federal efforts to foster an

environmentally literate citizenry. In addition to

EPA, other governmental and corporate partners have

included the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and

Interior, Phillips Petroleum, Church & Dwight Co.,

Inc., and R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company. In the

past five years, the Foundation has awarded 110

grants and leveraged $1.9 million in federal funds

along with $2.2 million from new non-federal

sources, in total supporting more than $4 million

worth of national, state, and local environmental

education and training projects.

The Environmental Education Division has

established partnerships with various nonprofit

educational and environmental organizations such

as the North American Association for

Environmental Education (NAAEE), National

Wildlife Federation, National Audubon Society, and

various state and regional environmental education

organizations. The Environmental Education

Division also has established partnerships with

various private corporations including Time-Warner,

General Motors, Keebler, Dow Chemical, Motorola,

Niagara Mohawk Power Company, and Church &

Dwight Co., Inc. Specific projects include the

development and distribution of educational

materials such as videos and teachers’ guides and the

sponsorship of various youth programs such as the

President’s Environmental Youth Awards program.
22

REACHING ACROSS INTERNATIONAL

BOUNDARIES

The Environmental Education Division, in

cooperation with EPA’s Office of International

Activities (OIA), negotiated a Trilateral Memorandum

of Understanding (MOU) on Environmental

Education among Canada, Mexico, and the United

States. The MOU was signed in a ceremony in

Washington, D.C. in September 1992. The Director of

the Environmental Education Division, the President

of the National Environmental Education and

Training Foundation, and the Curator of the

Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of

American History have represented the United States

on the trilateral committee charged with the

implementation of the agreement. Activities covered

by the agreement include information sharing on

education and training policies, approaches, and

materials; support and participation in seminars,

workshops, and conferences; and trilateral initiatives

or projects involving youth.

The Environmental Education Division also works

with EPA’s OIA to support public-private initiatives

that include environmental education. These

initiatives include the establishment of the following

centers: the Caribbean Environment and

Development Institute (Puerto Rico, 1992), the

Regional Environmental Center for Central and

Eastern Europe (Budapest, Hungary, 1990), and the

Environmental Education and Information Center

(Kiev, Ukraine, 1992). The Environmental Education

Division also supports OIA’s activities in hosting

international visitors from around the world and has

briefed representatives from more than 100 countries

on environmental education over the past five years.

F. HOW EPA’S IMPLEMENTATION OF

THE ACT RESPONDS TO ISSUES AND

CHALLENGES FACED BY THE FIELD

Congress was aware of many of the issues and

challenges discussed above facing the field of

environmental education as evidenced by many of the

programs created under the National Environmental

Education Act. The following discussion highlights

how EPA’s implementation of the Act responds to

many of these issues and challenges such as

increasing support for teacher training, increasing

access to high quality materials and programs,

strengthening state and local government programs,

encouraging environmental careers, reaching new

audiences, and promoting partnerships.

The Environmental Education Division has designed

the Environmental Education Grants Program to

respond to many of the issues and challenges

discussed above. For example, the Environmental

Education Division’s 1997 grant solicitation notice

targets, among several priorities, those projects

which:

• Build state, local, or tribal capacity to develop

and deliver environmental education programs

• Use environmental education to advance state,

local, or tribal education reform goals

• Improve teaching skills

• Promote environmental careers

• Educate low-income and culturally diverse

audiences

The solicitation notice also places emphasis on

increasing access to existing materials by

encouraging applicants to request funds for projects

that use existing environmental curricula rather

developing new materials. Because a significant

amount of quality curricula have already been

developed and are under-utilized, EPA considers

funding the development of new curricula only where

the applicant demonstrates there is a need.

The Environmental Education Division also has

designed the Environmental Education and Training

Program to respond to many of the issues and

challenges discussed above. For example, the

training program increases support for training

teachers and other education professionals. The

program also places strong emphasis on increasing

access to existing materials, increasing support for

existing programs, and for promoting partnerships.

EPA’s 1995 “Invitation for Proposals,” which

solicited applications from universities and nonprofit

organizations to operate the program for the second

three year phase of the program, identified the

following key goals of the program:

• To support and expand existing quality training

efforts

• To identify, evaluate, and disseminate “model”

education materials, teaching methods, and

programs

• To strengthen and expand partnerships and

networks

The “Invitation” strongly encouraged institutions to

form a consortium to operate the training program

because EPA believes partnerships can help leverage

scarce resources, improve effectiveness, and avoid

duplication of effort in a field which is highly
23

fragmented. The “Invitation” also required that

training activities meet the needs of diverse ethnic

and cultural groups.

The training program also responds to other issues

and challenges facing the field such as the need to

support environmental education research, to

integrate environmental education into education

reform activities, and to build state capacity. For

example, through the training program, an

assessment of student environmental literacy has

been designed and conducted to ensure that the field

has the proper instruments to determine whether

environmental education programs are working (that

is, if they provide individuals with the critical

thinking skills they need to make responsible

environmental decisions). In addition, the training

program emphasizes the importance of integrating

environmental education into mainstream education

by tying environmental education to education

reform efforts in the sciences, social sciences, and

geography. Finally, the program encourages

building coordinated statewide capacity to develop

and deliver quality programs.

The Environmental Education Division also

undertakes various other activities to respond to

issues and challenges such as the need to support

and encourage environmental careers and to promote

partnerships. For example, the internship and

scholarship programs discussed above provide

opportunities for post-secondary students to pursue

environmental careers, especially in the

environmental sciences. Examples of efforts to

promote partnerships include sponsorship and

support for national, regional, and state-wide

conferences. The Environmental Education Division

also has established groups such as the National

Environmental Education Advisory Council to

facilitate partnerships between EPA, states, schools,

universities, nonprofit organizations, the private

sector, and the Federal Task Force on Environmental

Education to facilitate partnerships among federal

agencies.
24

This report to Congress by the

National Environmental

Education Advisory Council

describes the current status of

environmental education in the

United States and examines EPA’s

progress in implementing the

National Environmental Education

Act. In assessing the status of

environmental education, the Council

examined a wealth of programs

comprising an array of approaches

and strategies and targeting a range

of audiences. Some are longer running, larger in

scope, or more effective than others; however, all

contribute to the health and welfare of the nation.

The nationwide sweep of who is participating in

environmental education revealed many players.

Federal, state, and local agencies, universities and

schools, nongovernmental organizations, museums

and nature centers, businesses and corporations—all

are engaged in supporting and implementing

environmental education programs. No single

government agency or private entity can manage all

these forces at play.

But a clear, overriding assessment emerged:

environmental education is important and necessary

to the health and welfare of the nation. It is the

federal government’s responsibility to: 1) uphold the

ideals of environmental education as a process that

leads to good citizenship; and 2) provide a supportive

climate for the development and implementation of

environmental education programs on state and local

levels and the pursuit of creative and responsible

activity in the private sector.

As the federal agency Congressionally mandated to

implement the National Environmental Education

Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

makes substantial contributions to the success of

environmental education nationwide. But it is one

among many critical players. During the first five

years of the Act’s implementation, EPA’s

Environmental Education Division (EED) has been

challenged with developing and managing a large

program with diverse activities. During this time, the

office and program have been given limited resources.

These three factors—a broad field with many players,

a diverse program to manage, and limited resources—

have affected EPA’s ability to implement the Act.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION

As Congress looks to reauthorize the

Act, the Council believes that

Congress should be less prescriptive

in the way funds are allocated among

various sections of the Act and

mandated programs, giving EED

more control and flexibility in

determining the most effective use of

funds (e.g., allowing EED to award

more grants under Section 6 and to

use less for administrative expenses

under Section 4). This will also allow

EED, with guidance from the Council,

to respond better to shifting needs and priorities.

What should be the work of EPA in environmental

education? This has been an ongoing question since

the Act was first proposed. From professionals in

nongovernmental organizations and state programs

who for years have been running programs, to others

struggling to initiate new ones, all have looked to

EPA’s new role as a way of boosting their efforts.

Some have hoped that a unifying plan would emerge

that would bring the nation’s diverse activities

together into a stronger, effectively managed whole.

All have looked to the federal government for

leadership in helping to chart a vision for

environmental education into the future.

It is the Council’s opinion that distinctions should be

made between those activities EPA should support as

policy and those which it can support through actual

funding. The potential for the former is by practical

nature more far-reaching. Furthermore, the Council

and EED believe that the actual way environmental

education is delivered should be determined at the

state, local, and tribal levels.

Federal funding, by its nature being limited, should

focus on models that can be replicated with state,

local, or private money. In this manner, the federal

government assumes a role similar to private

philanthropy, which serves to help innovate, create

new programs, and leverage other support. But

unlike private foundations, whose interest in

environmental education has been sporadic, focused

on specific issues, or serving geographic regions, the

federal government’s role can be consistent, longer

term, supportive of process, and broader based

geographically.
25

Finally, it is the federal government’s role to engage in

cooperative relations with other nations, particularly

Canada and Mexico, with whom the United States

shares many of its resources. EED, in cooperation

with the EPA Office of International Activities, should

seek further cooperation with other nations to

promote worldwide awareness and education for

sustainable living.

This realistic view of the role the federal government

should play in environmental education forces one to

ask, “Where does the responsibility for long term

financial support for environmental education lie?”

The Council believes it is through state and local

activity, supplemented by private funds. Here

education is at its best, driven by citizens who are in

touch with the issues, with the educational needs of

their youth, and with the quality of their teachers and

effectiveness of their schools. Here the goals of

environmental education find immediate expression

in the daily exercise of freedoms and responsible

actions.

To succeed, the work of environmental education

needs increased support and participation from all

sectors. People everywhere must see themselves as

stakeholders in one clear goal: creating an informed,

skilled, and motivated citizenry that can make

responsible decisions in a world of complex

environmental challenges. This goal can be achieved

through persistent, responsible actions by informed

citizens whose concern extends to future generations.

Based on the Council’s assessment of the status of

environmental education in the United States and on

the progress of EED to date, the Council recommends

the following eight actions:

Recommendation

MAKE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION A

PRIORITY ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND

ENHANCE EPA’S LEADERSHIP ROLE

A. State agencies, school districts, and

nongovernmental organizations should continue

to work together to ensure that environmental

education is a priority at the local, state, and

national level.

B. Congress should continue to appropriate funding

to EPA at the authorized levels to enable EPA to

implement the National Environmental

Education Act. Congress should ensure that

sufficient funds are appropriated to fully staff

EPA headquarters and regional offices and to

support all programs and activities mandated

under the Act.

C. Congress should reauthorize the National

Environmental Education Act of 1990 for at least

5 additional years and authorize appropriations

at the current authorization level. Congress

should provide EPA with greater flexibility in

determining how funds are allocated among

mandated programs and activities to allow EPA

to respond to shifting needs and priorities in the

field and to manage the program in a costeffective manner.

D. The EPA Administrator should make

environmental education a priority by:

1) integrating it into every program’s mission;

2) giving EED the authority and resources to

coordinate all environmental education efforts

within EPA; and 3) making the operation of the

Federal Task Force on Environmental Education

a priority for EED. These actions would ensure

consistency in EPA’s approach and support for

environmental education as well as leverage

EPA’s and other federal agencies’ resources

more effectively.

Recommendation

INCREASE AND SUSTAIN SUPPORT FOR STATE,

LOCAL, AND TRIBAL EFFORTS

A. Federal, state, and tribal government agencies,

nonprofit organizations, foundations, the private

sector, and others should support environmental

education programs that are developed and

implemented at the state, local, and tribal levels.

This includes continued support by EED of such

programs under Section 6 of the Act, the

Environmental Education Grants Program.

B. Federal, state, and tribal government agencies,

nonprofit organizations, foundations, the private

sector, and others also should support programs

which emphasize the coordinated delivery of

environmental education programs, especially on

a statewide basis. EED also should make

funding the establishment of statewide

environmental education offices, coordinators,

and coordinating councils a greater priority

under Section 5 of the Act, the Environmental

Education and Training Program and Section 6,

the Environmental Education Grants Program. In

addition, Congress should provide EPA with the

statutory authority to provide additional support

for statewide efforts.

C. States should consider adopting environmental

education legislation. For reference, model state

legislation has been developed by the Council of

State Governments (see Appendix E).

1

2
26

Recommendation

LEVERAGE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESOURCES

AND STRENGTHEN LONG-TERM CROSSSECTOR PARTNERSHIPS

A. Congress should reauthorize funding to support

the National Environmental Education and

Training Foundation and its important work to

leverage private sector resources for

environmental education.

B. EED should continue to promote effective public

and private partnerships through its grant

program, and work closely with other federal

agencies to coordinate public support for

environmental education.

C. Foundations should provide more consistent and

multi-year support for all aspects of

environmental education.

Recommendation

ENHANCE AND INCREASE SUPPORT FOR

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS

AND NONFORMAL EDUCATORS

A. Federal agencies, such as EPA and the U.S.

Department of Education, states, local

communities, universities, colleges, institutions,

businesses, and grantmaking organizations

should fund and promote in-service teacher

education. EED should continue to provide

strong leadership and support for the Section 5

Environmental Education and Training Program.

B. The U.S. Department of Education, state agencies

responsible for teacher licensing, and groups

such as the Council of Chief State School Officers,

National Association of Boards of Education, and

the National Education Association should

promote and improve pre-service teacher

professional development.

C. Foundations, federal and state agencies, and

grantmaking institutions should fund studies

that assess teacher preparation in environmental

education and evaluate teaching practices as a

function of pre-service and in-service

environmental education.

Recommendation

INTEGRATE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

INTO EDUCATION REFORM AND

IMPROVEMENT

A. EPA and the Department of Education, states,

local school systems, the Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development, the

American Association of School Administrators,

the National Association of Secondary School

Principals, the National Association of

Elementary School Principals, national teachers

organizations, the Council of State Chief School

Officers, nonprofit educational organizations

and associations, and the National Association

of State Boards of Education should help schools

promote and enhance environmental education.

B. Federal and state agencies and organizations

should also: 1) develop model environmental

education outcomes for K-12 and teacher

education; 2) encourage environmental literacy

testing programs; 3) establish voluntary

certification guidelines for professionals in

environmental education; and 4) promote

environmental education program guidelines.

Recommendation

TARGET NEW AUDIENCES

A. Nonprofit organizations, educational

institutions, government agencies, and

individuals should target and reach out to new

and non-traditional environmental education

audiences such as Native Americans, senior

citizens and other adults, as well as culturallydiverse, low-income, and physically-challenged

populations. This includes adapting existing

environmental education materials for these

audiences and targeting environmental

education programs.

Recommendation

INCREASE SUPPORT FOR EVALUATION,

COMPLETE GUIDELINES, AND IMPROVE

ACCESS TO MATERIALS AND INFORMATION

ON PROGRAMS

A. EED should continue to support the

development or maintenance of an

environmental education resource library

through the Environmental Education and

Training Program under Section 5 of the

National Environmental Education Act. The

goal is to ensure that quality education materials,

teaching methods, and programs that have

already been developed are used more fully. A

process should be fully established for

identifying, evaluating and disseminating

information on existing “model” materials,

methods, and programs. This resource library

should be tied to existing libraries, where

possible, and appropriate technology should be

4

5

6

7

3
27

used to disseminate information widely through

hard copy and electronic distribution.

B. Federal and state agencies, colleges, universities,

businesses, and grantmaking institutions should

use the environmental education resource library,

discussed under Recommendation 7.A above,

and other resources to identify gaps in

environmental education materials and programs

and to fund the development of new materials

and programs where needed.

C. Federal and state agencies and colleges and

universities should identify relevant instruments

for evaluating materials and promote their use by

environmental educators.

D. Federal and state agencies, colleges and

universities, and nonprofit organizations, should

stress the importance of including investigation

and action skills development for environmental

education materials.

E. EPA, the U.S. Department of Education, states,

and professional societies should promote the

adoption of high quality environmental science

and environmental social studies courses and

teaching materials for middle and high schools.

F. Federal and state agencies, colleges, universities,

businesses, and grantmaking institutions should

support national studies on the status of

environmental literacy and the determinants of

responsible environmental behavior following

instruction in environmental education among K12 students, post-secondary students, and adult

populations.

Recommendation

ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT

ENVIRONMENTAL CAREERS

A. Federal and state agencies, nongovernmental

organizations, universities, schools, and

businesses should: 1) support career awareness

opportunities for young people; 2) fund

environmental internship opportunities within

and outside the government; 3) establish

community and regional mentor programs for

high school students, particularly minority

students, interested in environmental careers;

and 4) send speakers and workshop leaders to

provide urban and minority students with

opportunities to interact with environmental

professionals.

B. The organizations mentioned in recommendation

8.A, especially universities and state and federal

Departments of Labor, should help to provide an

evaluation of long-term environmental career

opportunities. This evaluation will require a

better understanding of the breadth of careers in

the environmental field, a status report on current

environmental careers, and a forecast of future

needs for environmentally-trained professionals.

Identification of these needs will help educators

prepare students for jobs of the future.

8
28

VI. CONCLUSION

What is environmental

education and why

is it so critical?

Environmental education is a

lifelong learning process aimed at

developing an environmentally

literate citizenry that has the

knowledge, skills, and commitment

to make responsible decisions that

impact environmental quality.

Environmental education:

• Teaches people of all ages how

the quality of life is inherently linked to the

quality of the environment

• Helps ensure a workforce that has the critical and

creative thinking skills and knowledge to work

across disciplines to find innovative solutions to

complex environmental issues

• Provides all citizens with the informaton and

tools they need to make sound decisions about

the environment and participate in local, state,

national, and international policymaking

• Improves the way we educate new

generations so that they

understand the links among

science, geography, civics, math,

history, and language arts— and

how the world as we know it

depends on ecological integrity

• Ensures that all Americans have

opportunities to appreciate and

experience the incredible diversity

of life on Earth and learn that

humans are a part of nature—not

separate from it

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has done

a commendable job of implementing a national

environmental education effort with limited

resources. However, there is much more to be done

and they cannot do it alone. Environmental

education must become a priority at the local, state,

national, and international level so that—as a nation

and as leaders in an increasingly interdependent

world—we can make balanced decisions that address

the complex social, political, economic, and

environmental issues of our time. The members of

this Council believe that to ensure a sustainable

future we must all work together to make

environmental education a priority now.
29

REFERENCES

Champeau, Randy. 1990. “Perspectives on Pre-service Education Students on

Environmental Education Coursework.” In: Preparing Classroom Teachers to Be

Environmental Educators, editors D.C. Engleson and J.F. Disinger. Troy, OH.

NAAEE. Pages 25-36.

Disinger, J.F. 1993. “Environment in the K-12 Curriculum: An Overview.” In:

Environmental Education Teacher Resource Handbook, editor R. Wilke. Kraus

International Publications. Milwood, NY.

Environmental Education Associates, Inc. 1993. “State-by-State Overview of EE

Standards.” Washington, DC.

Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET)

Committee on Education and Training (CET). September 17, 1993. Report of the

Ad Hoc Working Group on Environmental Education and Training.

Federal Register. December 10, 1996. Fiscal Year 1997 Environmental Education Grants Program; Solicitation Notice.

Pages 65106-65117.

Harris, L., V.L. Tarrance, and C.C. Lake. 1989. The Rising Tide: Public Opinion, Policy, and Politics. Americans for the

Environment, Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation. Washington, DC.

Hart, Peter D. Research Associates, Inc. December 1994. Key Findings from a Post-Election Voter Survey Conducted for

the National Wildlife Federation.

Hungerford, Harold, R., R. Ben Peyton, and Richard J. Wilke. 1980. “Goals for Curriculum Development in

Environmental Education.” Journal of Environmental Education. Volume 11 Number 3. Pages 42-47.

Hungerford, Harold and Trudi L. Volk. 1990. “Changing Learner Behavior Through Environmental Education.” Journal

of Environmental Education. Volume 21 Number 3. Pages 8-21.

Iozzie, Louis A. , editor. 1984. “A Summary of Research in Environmental Education, 1971-1982.” The Second Report of

the National Commission on Environmental Education Research. NAAEE Monograph #2. Columbus, OH. ERIC/

SMEAC.

Iozzie, Louis A. 1989. “What Research Says to the Educator: Part One, Environmental Education and the Affective

Domain.” Journal of Environmental Education. Volume 20, Number 3. Pages 3-9.

Kennedy, M.M. 1991. “Policy Issues in Teacher Education.” Phi Delta Kappa. Volume 72, Number 9. Pages 658-665.

Marcinkowski, Thomas, J. 1990. “The New National Environmental Education Act: A Renewal of Commitment.”

Journal of Environmental Education. Volume 22, Number 2. Pages 7-10.

Marshall, Karen. 1987. Unpublished draft. “State Legislation for Environmental Education: Survey and Report.”

National Wildlife Federation. Washington, DC.

Minnesota Department of Education. 1994. Parent and Non-Parent Survey on Graduation Requirements and Other

Educational Issues. Minneapolis, MN.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. U.S.

Government Printing Office. Washington, DC.

National Consortium for Environmental Education and Training. February 1994. National Survey of Environmental

Education Teacher Inservice Education.

National Environmental Education Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-619).

National Forum on Partnerships Supporting Education About the Environment. November 1996. Education for

Sustainability: An Agenda for Action. A demonstration project of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development.

U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, DC. ISBN0-16-048783-8.

North American Association for Environmental Education (NAAEE). October 1996. Environmental Education Materials:

Guidelines for Excellence.
30

NAAEE. September 1996. Environmental Education and Training Partnership Third Quarter Report (April - June 1996).

Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Orr, David W. 1992. Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World. SUNY Press. Albany, NY.

President’s Council on Sustainable Development. February 1996. Sustainable America: A New Consensus for

Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment for the Future. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington,

DC.

Ramsey, John M. and Harold R. Hungerford. 1989. “The Effects of Issue Investigation and Action Training on

Environmental Behavior in Seventh Grade Students.” Journal of Environmental Education. Volume 20, Number 4.

Pages 29-34.

Roper Starch Worldwide Inc. December 1994. Survey on Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors of American Youth

with an Emphasis on Youth from Disadvantaged Areas. Conducted for the National Environmental Education and

Training Foundation.

Roth, Charles E. 1992. Environmental Literacy: Its Roots and Directions in the 1990s. Columbus, OH. ERIC/CSMEE.

Ruskey, Abby and Richard Wilke. 1994. Promoting Environmental Education: An Action Handbook for Strengthening

EE in Your State and Community. University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point Foundation Press, Inc. Amherst, Wisconsin.

Ruskey, Abby and Richard Wilke. 1996. “50 State Survey Shows “Results”: States are Making Progress Toward

Comprehensive Environmental Education Programs.” The Environmental Education Advocate. Winter. Pages 1, 3-5.

Simmons, Deborah A. 1989. “More Infusion Confusion: A Look at Environmental Education Curriculum Materials.”

Journal of Environmental Education. Volume 20, Number 4. Pages 15-18.

Simmons, Deborah A. 1994. The NAAEE Standards Project: Papers on the Development of Environmental Education Standards.

Washington, DC. NAAEE.

Simmons, Deborah A. 1995. “Environmental Education’s Role in Education Reform,” A Discussion Paper Submitted to

the U.S. Department of Education. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Northern Illinois University.

UNESCO. 1978. Final Report, Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education. Organized by UNESCO in

cooperation with UNEP. Tbilisi, USSR. 14-26 October 1977. UNESCO ED/MD/49.

U.S. Department of Education. 1991. America 2000: An Education Strategy Sourcebook. Washington, DC.

Wall Street Journal. 1991.

Weis, Judith S. 1990. “The Status of Undergraduate Programs in Environmental Science.” Environmental Science and

Technology. Volume 24, Number 8. Pages 116-121.

Weis, Judith S. et al. 1992. “Report on the Workshop on Undergraduate Environmental Science Education.” The

Environmental Professional. Volume 14, Number 4. Pages 33-37.

World Wildlife Fund. 1993. A Biodiversity Education Survey. Published in conjunction with the University of Wisconsin,

Stevens Point. Washington, DC.
31

APPENDICES
32

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ACT OF 1990 (P.L. 101-619)

On November 16, 1990, the National Environmental Education Act (P.L. 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 Administrator 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.

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.
33

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 million in FY 1994; $7.8 million in

FY 1995; $5.6 million in FY 1996; and $7.8 million in FY 1997.
34

MEMBERS:

Kristina Allen (1994-1996)

(Formerly with Arizona Department of Education)

14843 North 63rd Avenue

Glendale, AZ 85306

Phone and FAX: (602) 978-3835

Alternate FAX: (602) 789-3903

E-mail: wildvision@aol.com

Rodney Bates (1994-1996)

General Manager

Nebraska Educational Telecommunications

P.O. Box 83111

Lincoln, NE 68501

Phone: (402) 472-9333 (ext. 310/311)

FAX: (402) 472-1785

E-mail: rbates@unlinfo.unledu

Kathleen Blanchard (1994-1997)

Executive Vice President

Quebec-Labrador Foundation, Inc.

55 South Main Street

Ipswich, MA 01938

Phone: (508) 356-0038

FAX: (508) 356-7322

E-mail: kblanchard@qlf.org

Judy Braus (1994-1997)

Director of Environmental Education

World Wildlife Fund

1250 24th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20037

Phone: (202) 778-9542

FAX: (202) 861-8378

E-mail: judy.braus@wwfus.org

Peter Corcoran (1994-1996)

Chair and Associate Professor

Education Department

Bates College

111 Bardwell Street

Lewison, ME 04240

Phone: (207) 786-6064

FAX: (207) 786-6123

E-mail: pcorcora@bates.edu

Steve Hulbert (1994-1996)

Owner

Hulbert Auto Park

1100 South Plum Street

Olympia, WA 98501

Phone: (360) 754-3900

FAX: (360) 943-4904

Sue Smith (1994-1996)

Director of Education

Keep America Beautiful

21051 Rock Run Drive

Joliet, IL 60436

Phone: (815) 725-5897

FAX: (815) 725-7444

E-mail: kabusa@aol.com

John Strickler (1991-1997)

Executive Director

Kansas Association for Conservation and

 Environmental Education

2610 Claflin Road

Manhattan, KS 66502

Phone: (913) 537-7050

FAX: (913) 539-9584

E-mail: jstrickl@oz.oznet.ksu.edu

Richard Wilke (1991-1997)

Associate Dean

College of Natural Resources

University of Wisconsin

1900 Franklin

Stevens Point, WI 54481

Phone: (715) 346-2853

FAX: (715) 346-3624

E-mail: rwilke@uwsp.edu

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS:

Carole Wacey

U.S. Department of Education

600 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20202

Phone: (202) 401-3409

FAX: (202) 401-3093

E-mail: carole_wacey@ed.gov

Michelle Harvey

Vice President of Programs

National Environmental Education &

 Training Foundation (NEETF)

734 15th Street, NW

Suite 420

Washington, DC 20005

Phone: (202) 628-8200 (ext. 15)

FAX: (202) 628-8204

E-mail: harvey@neetf.org

APPENDIX B

MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COUNCIL

CHAIRPERSON: Arva Jackson (1994-1997)

11629 Regency Drive

Potomac, MD 20854

Phone and FAX: (301) 983-9439
35

APPENDIX C

U.S. EPA ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONTACTS

EPA REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION COORDINATORS

EPA ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION DIVISION (HEADQUARTERS)

EPA OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS, EDUCATION, AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS (HEADQUARTERS)

Loretta M. Ucelli, Associate Administrator

Phone: (202) 260-9828

FAX: (202) 260-3684

U.S. EPA

Environmental Education Division (1707)

401 M Street, SW

Washington, DC 20460

Phone: (202) 260-4965

FAX: (202) 260-4095

Michael Baker, Acting Director

Phone: (202) 260-4965

E-mail: baker.michael@epamail.epa.gov

Diane Berger, Grants, Tribal Scholarships

Phone: (202) 260-8747

E-mail: berger.diane@epamail.epa.gov

Doris Gillispie, Youth Programs, Federal Task Force

Phone: (202) 260-8749

E-mail: gillispie.doris@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 1 (CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT)

Maria Pirie

JFK Federal Building (RPM)

Boston, MA 02203

Phone: (617) 565-9447

FAX: (617) 565-3415

E-mail: pirie.marie@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 2 (NJ, NY, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands)

Terry Ippolito

290 Broadway 26th Floor

New York, NY 10007

Phone: (212) 637-3671

FAX: (212) 637-4445

E-mail: ippolito.terry@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 3 (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV)

Bonnie Smith

841 Chestnut Street (3EA20)

Philadelphia, PA 19107

Phone: (215) 566-5543

Fax: (215) 566-5102

E-mail: smith.bonnie@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 4 (Al, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN)

Rich Nawyn

100 Alabama Street, SW

Atlanta, GA 30303

Phone: (404) 652-8320

FAX: (404) 652-8335

E-mail: nawyn.richard@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI)

Suzanne Saric

77 West Jackson Boulevard (PI-19J)

Chicago, IL 60604

Phone: (312) 353-3209

FAX: (312) 353-1155

E-mail: saric.suzanne@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 6 (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX)

Jo Taylor

1445 Ross Avenue (6X)

Dallas, TX 75202

Phone: (214) 665-2204

FAX: (214) 665-2118

E-mail: taylor.jo@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 7 (IA, KS, MO, NE)

Rowena Michaels

726 Minnesota Avenue

Kansas City, KS 66101

Phone: (913) 551-7003

FAX: (913) 551-7066

E-mail: michaels.rowena@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 8 (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY)

Cece Forget

One Denver Place (OCPI)

999 18th Street, Suite 500

Denver, CO 80202-2405

Phone: (303) 312-6605

FAX: (303) 312-6961

E-mail: forget.cece@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 9 (AZ, CA, HI, NV, American Samoa, Guam,

Northern Marianas, Palau)

Stacey Benfer

75 Hawthorne Street (E2)

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone: (415) 744-1586

FAX: (415) 744-1605

E-mail: benfer.stacey@epamail.epa.gov

EPA Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, WA)

Sally Hanft

1200 Sixth Avenue (EXA-142)

Seattle, WA 98101

Phone: (206) 553-1207

FAX: (206) 553-0149

E-mail: hanft.sally@epamail.epa.gov

Sheri Jojokian, Student Fellowships, EPA Advisory Board

Phone: (202) 260-5283;

E-mail: jojokian.sheri@epamail.epa.gov

Ginger Keho, Resource Materials, International Activities,

National Advisory Council (beginning in 1997)

Phone: (202) 260-4129

E-mail: keho.ginger@epamail.epa.gov

Kathleen MacKinnon, Teacher Training, National Advisory

Council (from 1991 - 1996)

Phone: (202) 260-4951

E-mail: mackinnon.kathleen@epamail.epa.gov

George Walker, Grants, Federal Interagency Agreements

Phone: (202) 260-8894

E-mail: walker.george@epamail.epa.gov

Denise Graveline, Deputy Associate Administrator

Phone: (202) 260-7963

FAX: (202) 260-3150
36

APPENDIX D

The following is a listing of one key state agency contact in each of the 50 states, listed alphabetically by state. The person

listed is either the key environmental education agency contact or is an individual in another state agency with significant

environmental education responsibilities and is networked with the environmental education community statewide.

These individuals were reported by state leaders in a survey conducted by the National Environmental Education

Advancement Project (NEEAP) in the fall of 1995 and updated through individual calls to states by NEEAP staff in the fall

of 1996.

Dr. Frank Heatherly

Instructional Asst. Department

AL Department of Education

50 North Ripley Street, Room 334

Montgomery, AL 36130

(334) 242-8059

Peggy Cowan

Science Specialist

AK Department of Education

801 West 10th Avenue, Suite 200

Juneau, AK 99801

(907) 465-2826

Kerry Baldwin

Education Branch Chief

Arizona Game & Fish

2221 West Greenway Road

Phoenix, AZ 85023

(602) 789-3237

Bill Fulton

Science & EE Spec.

AR Department of Education

4 State Capitol Mall

Little Rock, AR 72207

(501) 682-4471

Bill Andrews

Education Programs Consultant

CA Department of Education

721 Capitol Mall

Sacramento, CA 95814

(916) 657-5374

Don Hollums

EE Consultant

Colorado Department of Education

201 East Colfax Avenue

Denver, CO 80203

(303) 866-6787

Diane Joy

Office of Environmental Education

Department of Environmental

Protection

Store Level, 79 Elm Street

Hartford, CT 06100

(860) 393-2449

John Cairns

Supervisor Science & EE

DE Department of Public

Instruction

PO Box 1402

Dover, DE 19903

(302) 739-3742

Jane Wilson

Executive Director

Kentucky EE Council

1 Game Farm Road

Frankfort, KY 40601

(502) 564-5937

Paul Long

Program Manager

Sci & EE

State of LA Dept of Education

PO Box 94064

Baton Rouge, LA 70804

(504) 342-3605

Tom Keller

Science Consultant

Maine Department of Education

Station 23

Augusta, ME 04333

(207) 287-5920

Gary Heath

EE Specialist

MD State Department of Education

200 West Baltimore Street

Baltimore, MD 21201

(410) 767-0324

Meg Colclough

Executive Office of Environ. Affairs

100 Cambridge Street

Boston, MA 02202

(617) 727-9800 x218

Mozell Lang

Science Specialist

MI Department of Education

PO Box 30008

Lansing, MI 48909

(517) 373-4226

Kathleen Lundgren

State Science Specialist

MN Dept of Education

649 Capitol Sq Building

550 Cedar Street

St. Paul, MN 55101

(612) 296-4071

Brian Knippers

Science Consultant

MS Department of Education

PO Box 771

Jackson, MS 39205

(601) 359-3778

Kathy Shea Abrams

Director, Office of EE

FL Department of Education

1311 A Paul Russell Road, Suite 201

Tallahassee, FL 32301

(904) 487-7900

Bob Moore

School Support Team

GA Department of Education

1766 Twin Towers

East Atlanta,GA 30344

(404) 656-4028

Colleen Murakami

Marine Educ. Coordinator

Dept. of Educ./General Educ. Branch

189 Lunalilio Home Road, 2nd Floor

Honolulu, HI 96825

(808) 396-2572

Dr. Richard Kay

Wildlife Ed Specialist

State of Idaho

Dept of Fish & Game

650 South Walnut, Box 25

Boise, ID 83707

(208) 334-2634

Gwen Pollock

State Science Coordinator

IL State Board of Education

100 North 1st Street

Springfield, IL 62777

(217) 782-2826

Joe Wright

Env. Science Consultant

Office of School Assist

Department of Education

229 Statehouse

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2798

(317) 232-9141

Duane Toomsen

Env. Educ. Consultant

Bureau of Inst & Curr.

Deparment of Education

Grimes State Office Building

Des Moines, IA 50319-0146

(505) 281-3146

Greg Schell

Science Consultant

Kansas Department of Education

120 E Tenth

Topeka, KS 66612

(913) 296-3851

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONTACTS IN STATE AGENCIES
37

Ginny Wallace

Environmental Education Office

Missouri Dept. of Conservation

PO Box 180

Jefferson City, MO 65102

(573) 751-4115 x294

Spencer Sartorius

Health & P.E. Specialist

Office of Public Instruction

Capitol Station

Helena, MT 59620

(406) 444-4434

Jim Woodland

Science Consultant

NE Department of Education

301 Centennial Mall South

Lincoln, NE 68509

(402) 471-4329

Eric Anderson

Science Education Consultant

NV Department of Education

700 East 5th Street, Capitol Complex

Carson City, NV 89710

(702) 687-9141

Dr. Edward Hendry

Curriculum Supervisor

NH Department of Education

101 Pleasant Street

Concord, NH 03301

(603) 271-2632

Tonya Oznowich

Office of Communications

Dept of Environmental Protection

Environmental Education Unit

CN 402

Trenton, NJ 08625-0402

(609) 984-9802

Larry Martinez

Science Educ Coordinator

NM State Department of Education

Santa Fe, NM 87501

(505) 827-6677

Barry Jamason

Coordinator, Env. Educ.

New York Dept. of Education

Room 314H

Albany, NY 12234

(518) 474-5922

Curt Ericksmoen

Dept of Public Instruction

600 E Boulevard

Bismark, ND 58501

Anne Taylor

Director

Office of Environment, Health & NR

Box 17687

Raleigh, NC 27611

(919) 733-0711

John Hug

Env Educ Consultant

OH Department of Education

65 Front Street, Room 1010

Columbus, OH 43215

(614) 466-2761

Mary Stewart

Science Coordinator

OK State Department of Education

2500 North Lincoln Blvd.

Oklahoma City, OK 73120

(405) 522-3524

Mark Page

Science Specialist

OR Department of Education

255 Capitol Street, NE

Salem, OR 97310-0203

(503) 378-3602

Patricia Vathis

Office of EE

PA Dept. of Education

333 Market Street, 8th Floor

Harrisburg, PA 17126-0333

(717) 783-6994

Dennis Cheek

Coordinator of Math, Sci, & Tech

RI Dept of Elem and Sec Education

22 Hayes Street, B-4

Providence, RI 02908

(401) 277-2821 x2150

Linda Sinclair

Education Association for Science

SC Dept of Education

Rm 507 Rutledge Building

1429 Senate Street

Colombia, SC 29201

(803) 734-0887

David Erickson

PLT Coordinator

South Dakota Division of Forestry

445 East Capitol Avenue

Pierre, SD 57501

(605) 773-4260

Karen Hanna Jenkins

Conservation Education

8th Floor Gateway Plaza

710 James Robertson Parkway

Nashville, TN 37243-0379

(615) 532-6249

Irene Pickhardt

Asst. Director of Science

Texas Education Agency

1701 North Congress Avenue

Austin, TX 78701-1494

(512) 463-9565

Brett Moulding

Science Specialist

Utah State Office of Education

250 East 500 South

Salt Lake City, UT 84111

(801) 538-7791

Jim Firebaugh

VA Department of Education

James Monroe Building

PO Box 2120

Richmond, VA 23216-2120

(804) 225-2651

Alan Kousen

State Science Consultant

Department of Education

120 State Street

Montpelier, VT 05620

(802) 828-3111

Tony Angell

Supervisor of EE Programs

Office of Superintendent of Public

Instruction

2800 NE 200th

Seattle, WA 98155

(206) 365-3893

Phyllis Barnhart

State Science Coordinator

WV Dept of Education

Office of General Education

1900 Kanawha Boulevard East

Capitol Complex, Building 6

Charleston,WV 25305-0330

(304) 558-7805

Shelley Fisher

Science Education Consultant

WI Dept of Public Instruction

PO Box 7841

Madison, WI 53707

(608) 266-3390

Helen McCracken

Science, Math, EE Coordinator

WY Department of Education

15400 Bishop Boulevard

Cheyenne, WY 82006

(307) 777-4531
38

APPENDIX E

MODEL STATE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION LEGISLATION

The proposal presented below would enable a state to establish an environmental education program both through the

traditional education system and through community and state agency activities to ensure that citizens are well-informed

on environmental issues. It would establish an environmental education board to guide the state environmental

education program, an office of environmental education to implement it, and an interagency coordinating committee to

facilitate cooperation among state agencies. The draft act calls for the development of a state plan for environmental

education, a grants program, and regional environmental education centers. It requires the development of an

environmental education curriculum framework for grades K through 12 and environmental education studies for

teacher pre-service and in-service education programs, as well as undergraduate education. The act also sets forth state

agency duties for non-formal environmental education initiatives. Drafted by a subcommittee of The Council of State

Governments’ National Environmental Task Force, the proposal was subsequently accepted by the Task Force at its

September 1992 meeting in Austin, Texas. The subcommittee members and additional reviewers of the proposal

represented state and federal education, environmental protection and natural resource agencies; state legislators;

academic institutions; environmental public interest organizations; and the private sector. Although the enactments of

several states were consulted in the drafting of the proposal, it is based largely on existing environmental education

legislation from the states of Arizona (Ch. 266, HB 2675, 1990), Florida (Ch. 92-128, 1990 and 1992 amendments), and

Wisconsin (1989 Assembly Bill 660). More information on this proposal or the activities of the CSG Environmental Task

Force may be obtained by contacting The Council of State Governments, Center for the Environment, 3560 Iron Works

Pike, P.O. Box 11910, Lexington, Kentucky 40578, (606) 231-1939.

Environmental Education Act—A Proposal of the CSG National Environmental Task Force

Section 1. [Short Title.] This act may be cited as the [state] Environmental Education Act.

Section 2. [Mission Statement.]

(a) It is in the public interest that a comprehensive environmental education initiative be undertaken that will result in

environmentally literate citizens who will effectively and constructively solve existing environmental problems,

prevent new ones, and maintain a sustainable environment for future generations. The appropriate audiences for

environmental education include formal education, business, government, non- profits, and citizens.

(b) Characteristics of an environmentally literate citizenry must include:

(1) Ecological literacy - a basic understanding of:

(i) ecological principles and concepts and their application;

(ii) the cause and effect relationship between human behavior and the environment; and

(iii) the economics of that relationship.

(2) Civics literacy - a basic understanding of the decision- making processes of governments, business and other social,

political and economic institutions impinging upon environmental issues.

(3) Mathematical, technological and scientific literacy - an understanding of the basic concepts of math and science to

evaluate environmental problems and make sound decisions regarding their resolution.

(4) Personal and social action skills - develop and use skills such as problem-solving, risk analysis and integrating

diverse perspectives to understand and contribute to decision-making processes.

(5) Attitudes - expression of care for other humans, present and future, and for other components of the

environment. These attitudes also affect understanding of ecology and civic responsibility.

(6) Motivation for action - the commitment to act for a healthy environment based on one’s attitudes, knowledge and

skills.

(c) There is hereby created a statewide environmental education program to implement the purpose of this act. The

program shall consist of an [environmental education board], an [office of environmental education], an [interagency

coordinating committee], a state plan, environmental education centers, a curriculum framework, teacher and

undergraduate environmental education programs, non-formal programs, and a finance and grants program.

Section 3. [Environmental Education Board.]

(a) There is created an [environmental education board] attached for administrative purposes to the [state department

of education or natural resources]. The [board] shall identify needs and set priorities for environmental education

within the state. It shall be responsible for reviewing, approving and transmitting a plan for environmental

education to the governor and the legislature every [two (2)] years. An annual appropriation should be provided to

finance the operation of the [board]. The appropriation level would range from [50,000] dollars to [100,000] dollars

depending upon the size, needs and resources of the state. Staffing of the [board] shall be provided by the [office of

environmental education].
39

(b) The [board] shall provide advice and assistance to the governor, the legislature, the [office of environmental

education], and other state agencies, including university extensions, conservation and environmental organizations,

community action services, and nature and environmental centers on policies and practices needed to provide

environmental education. The [board] shall serve as a forum for the discussion and study of problems that affect the

environment and environmental education. It shall provide assistance to and obtain information from the

[interagency committee] to coordinate the environmental education programs of state agencies.

(c) The [board] shall be responsible for the administration of the state’s environmental education grants program. The

[board] shall promulgate rules establishing the procedure for the awarding of grants. Grants under this section may

not be used to replace funding available from other sources. No more than [one- third (1/3)] of the total amount

awarded in grants in any fiscal year may be awarded to state agencies.

(d) The [board] shall be appointed by the governor for staggered [three- (3-)]year terms and include a balance of

government and non-governmental entities that consists of the following members or their designees with

experience in environmental education:

 (1) [state superintendent of public instruction];

 (2) [secretary of environmental protection];

 (3) [tribal government (if applicable)];

 (4) [secretary of natural resources];

 (5) [[one (1)] majority and [one (1)] minority party member of each house of the legislature];

 (6) [board of regents (specify number)];

 (7) [environmental advocacy organizations (specify number)];

 (8) [industrial community (specify number)];

 (9) [small business (specify number)];

 (10) [municipal corporations (specify number)];

 (11) [elementary and secondary school teachers (specify number)];

 (12) [ethnic minorities (specify number)]; and

 (13) [a professional environmental scientist].

Section 4. [Office of Environmental Education.]

(a) A state [office of environmental education] shall be established by the legislature. It shall be headed by an

environmental educator who is appointed by the [environmental education board]. The [office] should have supraagency authority and dependable funding. It may be administratively attached to an existing agency such as the

[state education or natural resources department].

(b) The responsibilities of the [office] shall include:

 (1) Assess the status of environmental literacy in the state’s students, teachers and citizens every [two (2)] years.

 (2) Prepare a plan for environmental education every [two (2)] years at the direction of the [environmental education board]

and with the assistance of the [interagency coordinating committee].

 (3) Provide assistance to the [environmental education board] in the administration and evaluation of the state environmental

education grants program.

 (4) Promote and aid in the establishment and evaluation of learner outcomes for pre K-12 school environmental education

programs through cooperation with the [state department of education].

 (5) Promote and aid in the development of pre-service and in- service environmental education programs for teachers through

cooperation with the [council on higher education] or its equivalent and the state’s colleges and universities.

 (6) Cooperate with federal government and state agencies and the private sector in developing, promoting and evaluating

programs of environmental education.

 (7) Function as an environmental education clearinghouse by:

 (i) reviewing and recommending environmental education materials;

 (ii) cooperating with state agencies and organizations in the development and distribution of an

environmental education newsletter;

 (iii) establishing an electronic capacity to disseminate databases of environmental education

information and to network with interstate and federal programs.

 (8) Promote the development of cooperative environmental education initiatives with the private sector.

 (9) Initiate, develop, implement, evaluate and market non- formal environmental education programs; facilitate, encourage and

support multi-school district cooperative efforts to assess the need for, develop and evaluate environmental education

curriculums; promote state government and private sector policy that is consistent with the environmental education

strategic plan established in paragraph (2) of this section, and coordinate non-formal environmental education with the K-12

and postsecondary environmental education programs.

 (10) Initiate research on environmental education as called for in the strategic plan by issuing contracts to colleges, universities

and other research based institutions.

 (11) Coordinate an environmental education conference on a periodic basis to assist in the dissemination, development and

achievement of the state’s environmental education strategic plan.

(c) Staffing. The [office of environmental education] should be administered by a professional environmental educator

and staffed with personnel having appropriate expertise and education.
40

Section 5. [Interagency Environmental Education Committee.]

(a) An [interagency environmental education committee] shall be established to promote networking, coordination and

cooperation among state agencies and federal, tribal and local agencies to promote the efficient distribution of

information and to facilitate the planning and development of educational programs and materials. One agency shall

be given responsibility for convening and facilitating the functions of the [committee].

(b) The [committee] shall be composed of [specify number] persons with experience in environmental education and the

members shall consist of employees of the following agencies that have been appointed by the agency head: [state

departments of education, economic development, environmental protection, resource management, land, parks,

water resources, tourism, environment commission, geological survey, energy, fish and wildlife, agriculture, mining,

attorney general, health, transportation, local government/community affairs, general services, local conservation

districts, county extension, community services, youth groups and minority affairs]. The chairperson shall be elected

by the members.

(c) Members of the [committee] shall also serve as environmental education coordinators for their respective agencies,

and shall direct an assessment of their own agency’s target audiences and appropriate programs. The [committee]

shall establish subcommittees as needed and assist with the development and implementation of the state’s

environmental education strategic plan.

(d) The [committee] shall develop and maintain a memorandum of understanding to specify methods by which the

agencies can share their resources to benefit environmental education in the state.

(e) Members of the [committee] are not eligible to receive compensation and are not eligible for reimbursement of

expenses from the [committee].

Section 6. [State Plan.]

The [office of environmental education], with assistance from the [interagency committee] should coordinate, write and

publish a plan for environmental education. It should be reviewed and approved by the [environmental education

board] and transmitted to the governor and the legislature every [two (2)] years. A report on the status of

environmental literacy in the state should be conducted every [two (2)] years to serve as a basis for the plan. The plan

shall be officially called the [“Governor’s Plan for Environmental Education”].

Section 7. [Grants Program.]

The [environmental education board] shall award grants [annually] to non-profit organizations and public agencies for

the development, dissemination and evaluation of environmental education programs. Proposals addressing needs and

priorities identified by the [board] or included in the strategic plan should receive priority. The [office of environmental

education] staff shall administer the grants program and develop an evaluation plan. Grant recipients must provide a

match of at least [25] percent of the amount of the grant. No more than [33] percent of the grant funds shall be awarded

to state agencies in [one (1)] year. The [environmental education board] shall promulgate rules establishing the specific

criteria and guidelines for the program. An annual state appropriation ranging from [200,000] dollars to [2,500,000]

dollars shall be provided to fund the grants program. Funding mechanisms are described in the Section 14 of this act.

Section 8. [Environmental Education Centers.]

(a) Regional environmental education centers should be established at state universities. They should perform the

following functions:

 (1) provide graduate level and continuing education courses for educators;

 (2) develop and maintain a resource library for teachers and other educators that includes curriculum materials, software and

audio visual materials;

 (3) provide assistance to schools in the development of their environmental education curricula;

 (4) coordinate an annual conference for resource providers and educators to share, plan and implement environmental

education;

 (5) support teachers to conduct action research or classroom- based research on environmental education strategies and

student outcomes;

 (6) network with interstate, federal, regional and tribal environmental education and training centers;

 (7) provide for residential environmental education experiences for all students.

(b) Regional environmental education centers shall receive an annual appropriation to finance the staff, travel and

supplies necessary to carry out these functions.

Section 9. [Curriculum Framework.]

(a) The [office of environmental education] and the [environmental education board] shall work with the [state

department of education] to develop a curriculum framework for establishing environmental education programs in
41

all public and private elementary and secondary schools. The programs shall integrate environmental concepts, skills

and attitudes into the regular curriculum, where appropriate, including but not limited to:

 (1) basic ecological relationships including firsthand real life experiences in varied natural and built environments with

organisms as they interact with their environment;

 (2) issue investigation, analysis, evaluation, problem-solving, prediction, and action skills that enable the student to

understand concepts such as the interrelationships and interdependence of natural and human systems;

 (3) the values and behaviors of individuals, institutions and nations regarding environmental problems;

 (4) alternative responses to environmental issues and their consequences; and

 (5) the potential controversies arising from multiple use patterns of public and private lands.

(b) Model measurable learner outcomes. The program shall be implemented through the [state department of

education]. The program should be comprehensive and include learner outcomes, assessments, feedback

mechanisms and instructional processes. The [state department of education] shall develop curriculum integration

models for a measurable learner outcome-based environmental education program. The models must include:

 (1) the specific environmental education and curriculum integration goals;

 (2) the various options to achieve the goals;

 (3) a hierarchy of learner outcomes composed of state learner goals; integrated learner outcomes; program learner outcomes;

and course, unit and lesson learner outcomes;

 (4) mechanisms to communicate the models;

 (5) an objective process to evaluate the progress to establish and implement a model integrated environmental education

curriculum;

 (6) methods to assess pupils’ environmental

Section 10. [Pre-service Teacher Education.]

(a) Pre-service education in environmental education is essential in order to foster an environmentally literate citizenry.

Future teachers must acquire the content and teaching skills to effectively instruct students in preschool through

grade 12.

(b) Teacher education pre-service programs are required to provide instruction in environmental education, including

ecological concepts, environmental issues and problems, developmentally appropriate practices, and use of a variety

of instructional curricula and materials. Teacher education should come from a variety of sectors, including

academia, environmentalists and the regulated communities.

(c) The [environmental education board] and the [office of environmental education] shall work with members of

teacher education institutions, natural resources departments in colleges and universities, the state higher education

council, the state board of regents, and representatives from private colleges and universities to develop guidelines

for incorporating environmental education into teacher education requirements.

(d) In states where teacher exams are required, environmental education knowledge and teaching skills should be

assessed by the exams.

(e) Pre-service teacher education should consist of the following components:

 (1) Definition of the environmental education competencies that teacher candidates are expected to acquire;

 (2) Definition of the acceptable approaches that can be used to develop the competencies;

 (3) A plan for evaluating the achievement of the competencies;

 (4) A plan for evaluating pre-service teacher environmental education programs and;

 (5) A timeline for implementing the required pre-service education programs at colleges and universities.

Section 11. [Staff Development: K-12 Teachers (In-service Education).]

In-service teachers should develop the same environmental education competencies specified for pre-service teachers.

To accomplish this:

 (1) In-service education in environmental education should be added to the courses recommended or required for recertification

or licensing;

 (2) Every teacher education institution shall be required to offer both pre-service and in-service courses in environmental

education;

 (3) State natural resources, environmental protection, parks, health and human services and education agencies shall develop

and publicize environmental education teacher in-services and/or professional internships related to their mission;

 (4) School districts shall be encouraged to develop environmental education staff development plans and seek matching funding

for implementation of these plans from the state grants program.

Section 12. [Undergraduate Environmental Education.]

(a) Universities, colleges and vocational institutions are required to implement programs that encourage environmental

literacy and provide opportunities for environmental stewardship among the student population.
42

(b) Such programs shall include at a minimum:

 (1) Course Requirement. Implementation of an environmental studies course requirement for all graduates, or the

development of an integrated general education program that accomplishes environmental literacy through its integration in

a variety of required courses.

 (2) Comprehensive Program Planning. The state higher education coordinating council or board of regents shall plan and

implement the following programs:

 (i) Environmental audit. Institutions shall conduct an [annual] environmental audit to review the

environmental and economic impact of the institution’s operations. This evaluation should include a review

of purchasing, waste disposal, energy usage and transportation practices. Institutions should implement

methods and processes to reduce the negative impacts of these activities on the environment.

 (ii) Assessment. Each institution shall review their activities (curriculum, internships, work study program,

scholarships) to evaluate how they can promote environmental literacy among their student population.

 (iii) Faculty development. Each institution shall provide opportunities and incentives for faculty of all

disciplines to learn how they can contribute to developing environmental literacy in the student body.

 (iv) Consortium. A consortium shall be developed to facilitate communication about existing environmental

education programs.

 (v) Environmental centers. Institutions shall be selected on a regional basis to serve as environmental centers

to accomplish the functions in Section of this act.

 (vi) Competency identification and assessment. Environmental literacy competencies required for all

graduates should be identified and a plan for assessing the achievement of these competencies shall be

developed and implemented.

 (vii) Environmental careers. Institutions should be encouraged to offer environmental career awareness

workshops for high school students and especially for under-represented populations.

Section 13. [Non-formal Education.]

(a) “Non-formal” refers to education conducted outside of traditional formal education systems. The audiences for nonformal environmental education are numerous and quite diverse. They include: general public, youth and adult

groups, local government, business and industry, environmental and conservation organizations, the media, elderly,

and ethnic and cultural groups.

(b) Non-formal programs should focus on communities, the media, and other state agencies not traditionally considered

part of the environmental protection/natural resources agenda.

(c) All state agency mission statements and particularly environmental protection or resource management agencies

shall contain an environmental education component.

(d) Agency Duties. An agency shall be charged with the following duties:

 (1) Establish a committee within the agency of representatives of all programs conducting education activities to facilitate

coordination and communications;

 (2) Conduct a periodic assessment of non-formal environmental education offered by the agency throughout the state;

 (3) Maintain an inventory of its environmental education materials, programs and resources;

 (4) Prepare a periodic report to the [interagency coordinating committee] and the state [environmental education board]

outlining environmental education programs, activities and needs;

 (5) Identify target audiences and programs;

 (6) Environmental protection leadership. State agency internal operations should serve as a model for waste and pollution

reduction, energy efficiency, and protection, preservation, and management of natural resources. The state [interagency

committee] shall outline ways in which state agencies can implement model environmental policies such as office waste

reduction and recycling, employee incentives for using mass transit, workplace energy conservation, native landscape

planting and native plant and wildlife habitat restoration around state office buildings, printing on recycled paper,

procuring paper with recycled content, and recycling of used oil and tires from state auto fleets;

 (7) Educate the regulated community (operators, builders, developers, private landowners, agriculture, water and air

dischargers, water and sewer authorities, and local to promote:

 (I) conservation and environmental protection;

 (ii) economic benefits of protecting the environment;

 (iii) the intrinsic valuing of natural resources;

 (iv) development/enhancement of a corporate environmental ethic and responsibility for environmental

protection;

 (8) Promote programs for the regulated community that:

 (i) provide examples of economically viable business/industry activities which have also benefitted the

environment;

 (ii) provide education programs and field experiences;

 (iii) establish awards programs (waste reduction award, environmental protection award, community action

award, best management practices award, habitat restoration award, etc.);

 (iv) establish or promote the development of an industry council on environmental education to promote

industry partnerships;

 (v) facilitate innovative industry environmental problem solving;

 (vi) provide workplace environmental education materials;

 (vii) promote public/private partnerships for environmental education programs and initiatives.
43

Section 14. [Finance.]

(a) Funds will be necessary to implement the environmental education program and create the [environmental

education board], [office of environmental education], and the grants program.

(b) There is hereby created a [special non-lapsing environmental education trust fund] in the state treasury. Monies for

the fund shall be authorized by the state legislature. All monies placed in the fund and the interest it accrues are

hereby appropriated, upon authorization by the governor and with advice from the [board], to accomplish the

purposes of this act. All monies in the fund shall only be used for environmental education. This fund is exempt

from provisions relating to lapsing of appropriations. On notice from the [board], the [state treasurer] shall invest

and divest monies in the fund. The [state treasurer] shall credit all monies earned from these investments to the

fund. The [board] shall develop a plan for the expenditure of monies in the fund.

Section 15. [Effective Date.] [Insert effective date.]
44

Structure Components Program Components

Funding

Components

State

Master PlanK-12 Instruction RequirementCoordinated Teacher InservicePreserviceCurriculum GuideObjectivesGrants ProgramAssessment

BoardOfficeCenters/Regional OfficesInteragency CommitteeState AssociationComputerized NetworkFunding SourcesTrust Fund

Totals

Alabama 6

Alaska 1

Arizona 9

Arkansas 12

California 7

Colorado 5

Connecticut 7

Delaware 6

Florida 9

Georgia 5

Hawaii 7

Idaho 1

Illinois 3

Indiana 4

Iowa 6

Kansas 4

Kentucky 10

Louisiana 4

Maine 2

Maryland 10

Massachusetts 11

Michigan 1

Minnesota 9

Mississippi 1

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

*Conducted by the National Environmental Education Advancement Project, led by the University of Wisconsin-Stevens

Point (1995).

APPENDIX F

RESULTS OF STATUS SURVEY ON COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

PROGRAMS AT THE STATE LEVEL*
45

APPENDIX F

Structure Components Program Components

Funding

Components

Totals State Master Plan K-12 Instruction Requirement Coordinated Teacher Inservice Preservice Curriculum Guide Objectives Grants Program Assessment Board Office Centers/Regional Offices Interagency Committee State Association Computerized Network Funding Sources Trust Fund

Missouri 2

Montana 2

Nebraska 3

Nevada 3

New Hampshire 3

New Jersey 6

New Mexico 2

New York 4

North Carolina 10

North Dakota 0

Ohio 7

Oklahoma 6

Oregon 4

Pennsylvania 9

Rhode Island 3

South Carolina 6

South Dakota 1

Tennessee 4

Texas 7

Utah 3

Vermont 2

Virginia 8

Washington 11

West Virginia 5

Wisconsin 9

Wyoming 3

 TOTALS 11 12 15 3 15 17 21 3 22 16 20 23 45 11 24 5

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●