Applicant: CESA 100 Title: Assessing the Environmental Literacy of the Class of 2010

Target audience: The 3000 students who make up the junior class at the ten school districts geographically located within CESA 100.

Need: To assess the environmental literacy of students about to graduate from high school.

Goals Addressed: Goal III.4 within the EE2010 document is to “create a set of exemplary criteria by which schools can self audit their EE programs….” The assessment and testing protocol utilized within this project could potentially be adopted by other districts or CESA’s.

Evidence of Need: Goal IV.3 of the EE2005 document is to “Support local environmental literacy efforts to determine the degree to which the Wisconsin model academic standards for environmental education are being achieved.” This is exactly what this project would do.

According to an April 20, 2001 memo from Dr. Daniel Sivek, WEEB Assessment Committee Co-chair to the WEEB, upon reviewing the Wisconsin Student Assessment System at grades four, eight, and 10:

“tests at the fourth, eighth, and tenth grades provide a very incomplete picture of the environmental literacy of Wisconsin students. It would be a leap of faith to suggest these tests assess environmental literacy. The tests are “shelf” tests with no evidence that assessing environmental literacy was an objective.”

Previous Effort: The Model Academic Standards for Environmental Education were printed in 1998. During the past decade school districts have incorporated EE into the districts’ curricula. While students have been evaluated on their learning, there has not been any district wide effort to formally assess the environmental literacy of students. Since this is the first academic class to be exposed to all levels of the curricula, assessing these students this year would establish a baseline. Unfortunately a long-term study was not begun ten years ago, so we have no data on the impact of introducing the EE curriculum within the various districts. Data from this project would form the foundation upon which future curriculum alterations would be based. For example, if the data showed a deficiency related to a specific performance standard, then additional learning opportunities in that area would be recommended. If a particular deficiency were found across districts then CESA 100 would seek resources to provide educational opportunities to address this deficiency.

Goal 1: To assess the environmental literacy of the junior class of students attending high school within a CESA 100 affiliated school district.

Objective 1. To have 95% of the junior class complete the “Environmental Survey of Wisconsin High School Students” that was first administered by the Wisconsin Center for Environmental Education in 1994.

Activity 1.1.1 Project director will determine assessment date (by August 1, 2008) for each district. Date for each district to be selected randomly and fall within a two week window (October 6-17, 2008).
Activity 1.1.3. District staff (most likely physical education staff since all junior students are required to take physical education) will administer the assessment (October 1-15,2008).

Activity 1.1.4. Project director will have assessments for each district machine scored. (October 6-20,2008)

Goal 2: To report and compare the results from the 2008 assessment to the “baseline” data collected via the 1994 survey and between districts.

Objective 1: To create a report (ten total) from which each district’s results may be compared to the baseline results.

Activity 2.1.1Project director will create a template report (layout and design) to which district specific data will be added. (Weeks 1 and 2 of November 2008)

Activity 2.1.2 Project director will use statistical software to generate composite score for each assessment question for each school district. (Week 4 of November 2008)

Activity 2.1.3 Activity 2.3.1 Project director will review data to identify areas of deficiency for each district (Weeks 1 and 2 of December 2008)

Activity 2.1.4 Project director will transfer data to the report template for each district )). (Week 1 January 2009)

Activity 2.1.5 Project director will arrange for duplicating of the 10 reports (5 copies each (3 WEEB, 1 CESA 100, 1 district (week 2 January 2009) and will post pdfs of the reports to CESA 100 website. (Week 3 January 2009)

Objective 2 To report the current status of environmental education within each school district.

Activity 2.2.1 Project director will design surveys described in #2, 3, and 4 below. (August 2007)

Activity 2.2.2. Project director will survey district staff to determine what formal EE programming is being offered at each of the grade levels within the district (e.g., PLT, Project WILD, Aquatic Wild, LEAF, KEEP, Angler Education, NWF Ranger Rick, Journey North, Solarwise for Schools, Junior Solar Sprint, Green and Healthy Schools, Governor’s High School Conference on the Environment, Envirothon, Electrathon, etc.)(October 2008)

Activity 2.2.3. Project director will survey district staff to determine what types of facilities are currently being utilized (e.g., day use at school forest, overnight at school forest, day use at nature center, overnight at nature center, day use at zoo, prairie, garden, pond, stream, arboretum, school based weather station, school based photovoltaic equipment, local park, state park, etc) (October 2008)

Activity 2.2.4 Project director will survey district staff to determine what environmental issues are currently being addressed within the curriculum (e.g., endangered species, invasive species, water quality, habitat management, global climate change, rain gardens, transportation, etc.)(October 2008)

Activity 2.2.5. Project director will compile survey results for each district to create a profile for the status of environmental education within the district. (November and December 2008)

Objective 3. To create a report from which the results of districts that have school forest education programs in place in 1994 and in 2008 can be compared to the results of districts that do not have school forest education programs in place. [Note: Three districts had programs in 1994, six now have programs, and four districts do not have any school forest programming.]

Activity 2.3.1 Project director will write report (February 2009), distribute report to districts (1^st week March 2009) and post pdf of report on website (1st week March 2009).

Dissemination: The project director will post reports on the CESA 100 website (by Jan 2009 and March 2009) and will also make a presentation at the fall 2009 WAEE conference.

Project Evaluation: District curriculum directors will be surveyed to seek input concerns information the assessment process has provided them and future actions the district will undertake based on the assessment information provided, and how CESA 100 can best support their efforts.

Staff Qualifications: Project director: Will Countussa, Assessment Coordinator for CESA 100, has worked for CESA 100 for fifteen years. He has a professional working relationship with the districts and has secured their commitment to participate in this project.

Continuation: Ideally it would be great to survey the junior class every year. However financial, staff, and other resource limitations preclude this. The project will thus be repeated every five years, immediately prior to the districts’ formal curriculum review of the environmental education curriculum. Each district will provide either the financial resources to hire CESA 100 staff to complete the assessment and data analysis or will have their own staff or students conduct the assessment and follow up.