OBAMA WANTS MORE ENVIRONMENAL LITERACY
Progress Made on Nature Deficit Disorder, But Not Enough
Conservationists consider Obama's budget a "historic moment," but still need administration and congressional action on two more fronts.
By Bill Schneider, 2-04-10
Calling it a “historic moment” and a “terrific first step,” conservationists applauded President Obama’s budget request that included, for the first time, money for “environmental literacy” for the U.S. Department of Education.
Great news, but keep in mind that it’s only the first step.
“Advancing the environmental literacy of our students is key to addressing today’s increasingly complex environmental and related economic, social, natural resource, and energy issues,” Don Baugh, director of the No Child Left Inside Coalition, said in a press release. “It will not only better prepare students for college and the 21st Century workforce, but help to combat childhood obesity and related health problems by getting kids outside to learn about the natural world….I commend the President and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan for recognizing the critical role that environmental education plays in preparing our students for the green economy.”
“The Department of Education took a historic step for the future economy by including environmental literacy…” Kevin Coyle, Vice President for Education and Training at the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), a founding member of the NCLI Coalition, added.
The press release also included praise of the budget request from Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) and Congressman John Sabanes (D-MD), authors of the No Child Left Inside Act (S.866, HR 2054) currently being deliberated in the both the Senate and House.
Isn’t it refreshing, for a change, to be heading in the right direction? President Obama and Secretary Duncan have made innovation and student achievement a major goal of the administration, and what they call “environmental literacy” is part of it.
How much money actually goes to environmental literacy is an elusive number, but it comes out of a proposed budget request of $1 billion for a program designed to improve instruction to support college- and career-readiness standards.
The NCLI Coalition, the nation’s leading voice for environmental education, includes 1,500 nonprofit groups and agencies and represents 50 million individuals, but even with that political punch, it still faces an uphill battle to beat Nature Deficit Disorder. The fight continues on these two frontlines:
Surgeon General Priorities. The NCLI Coalition and the NWF are pushing hard to convince our new Surgeon General, Dr. Regina Benjamin, “to promote the health benefits of children who engage in regular unstructured outdoor play in their backyards, at local parks, or any green space that offers the opportunity to connect with nature.”
This shouldn’t be a big stretch for Dr. Benjamin. First Lady Michelle Obama and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius have already announced plans for “a healthier America” through regular physical activity and better nutrition. The NCLI Coalition and NWF simply want that concept expanded to include “time unplugged” and making independent play outdoors and connecting with nature an integral part of that new vision.
“The medical, education, and environmental communities ask the Surgeon General to recommend that all American children and their families take time everyday to ‘Be Out There’ and interact with the natural world,” NWF spokesperson Rebecca Garland, said while supporting the expanded vision.
Garland is executive director of NWF program called Be Out There, a national campaign “to help American families raise happier, healthier children with a life-long love of nature.”
No Child Left Inside Act. On Earth Day 2009, Senator Reed and Congressman Sarbanes, along with 101 co-sponsors, introduced the No Child Left Inside Act. The bill authorizes new funding ($500 million over five years) for states to provide higher-quality, environmental education and to support outdoor learning activities. This critical legislation has gotten blown off the radar screen by Wall Street bailout, economic stimulus, health care and jobs legislation, but now, hopefully, Congress can get back to it. Passing it on Earth Day 2010 would be a grand idea.
Just in case you think the above isn’t a high priority compared to other things you’d like to see the Obama Administration and Congress doing, consider this:
A new study released by the Kaiser Family Foundation, found that daily electronic media use by children “is up dramatically” and today’s children have less contact with nature than any generation in human history. The average American child, in fact, now spends 7 hours and 38 minutes per day (53 hours per week) “plugged in.”
In other words, and not meaning to rain on the good news in Obama’s budget, we’re still losing this all-important battle even faster than we imagined.
Hopefully, Congress and the administration can heed this shocking news and act quickly to pass the NCLI Act and make fighting Nature Deficit Disorder a high priority for the Surgeon General so our next generation can receive a more robust education about connecting with our natural world.
[End of article]"Environmental Literacy" is good as long it doesn't end up becoming one sided environmental propaganda like anthropogenic climate change and global warming.
Comment By Tom Klumker, 2-04-10Radical environmentalism is directly responsible for a huge part of this nations economic woes and anything supported by the National Wildlife Federation is suspect, although on the surface this "No Child Left Inside " might be a great program, the whole idea of implanting environmental education into our schools may not be a good thing if the extremists have their input. Of course you can bet your bottom dollar they will.
Comment By TomK, 2-04-10When my nephew was in the second grade he came home one day and said his teacher had taught the class that his father
was an unfit parent because he owned guns.
The purpose of schools is suposed to be education, not indoctrination.
This isn't about getting kids outside, it's about indoctrinating them in the ways of the sierra club and thier ilk.
There is a concept alien to most Americans today. It's called parenting. When my mother wanted us outside, she would shove us out the door and lock it. I never had to do that with mine, I had a hard time getting them to come in.
We have to get away from the concept that the gov't is better qualified to raise your kids than you are.
Just thought I'd jump in before this comment thread got off track.
The NCLI program has nothing to do with gun control, wolves, or any other liberal plot, nor is it about teaching radical environmentalism in the classroom. It isn't even about teaching anything in classrooms. It's almost completely about getting children away from screens and giving them an opportunity to experience nature and develop a connection with the natural world that we have done, but that is more and more difficult for parents and teachers to achieve nowadays.
Please don't make controversy where there is none.
Bill
Sorry, but I smell propagandization here.
Went to the NCLI site and:
"Climate changes, depletion of natural resources, air and water problems, and other environmental challenges are pressing and complex issues that threaten human health, economic development, and national security. Finding wide-spread agreement about what specific steps we need to take to solve these problems is difficult. Environmental education will help ensure our nation’s children have the knowledge and skills necessary to address these complex issues."
I looked at the coalition lists, mostly nature parks and tour guides and whatnot...obviously looking for consistent business. Didn't see the "usual suspect" groups listed except maybe Audubon -- and increasingly, Montana FWP. And no "national" listing.
Still, gotta wonder who is lobbying, why this is hosted on the Chesapeake Bay Foundation website, who's bankrolling the effort. This ain't just spontaneous, ya know.
Dave, the Earth is not flat. Klunker it's science.
Comment By Jefe, 2-04-10An thro po gen ic cli mate chan ge
rolls right off the tongue, like cha ris mat ic mac ro fau na
Is that iambic pentameter?
Focusing on 'environmental literacy' only makes intuitive sense if we want our children to thrive and become the next generation of leaders. Unplugging our children from electronics and reconnecting them to nature does not mean that we're trying to make them environmentalists or conservationists. In my opinion, we should be exposing our children to both sides of issues so that they can become more responsible consumers who are able to utilize critical thinking skills before they make decisions. Even though the NCLI is about getting children outside, I think 'environmental literacy' should be a part of the curricula (just like cultural, civic, and economic literacy).
Environmental degradation poses extreme consequences to all people in all cultures around the world. No matter if one believes that humans play any role in this degradation, or to the extent of that role, the environmental issues we face as a global community are here. I'm not talking about 'global warming' or 'endangered species' - it's basic supply and demand. We demand more from nature that can be produced/recycled, and this lifestyle is not sustainable. (Even if you're just speaking about diversion from landfills.)
I'm a concerned parent and citizen - not a lobbyist or a special-interest supporter. I care because I love my child and I respect our interconnected relationship with the natural world. (Not suggesting that no one else does...just stating my worldview.)
No wonder kids dont want to go outside
aLL the wild country has been ruined by the right wing crazies who can't even saand to see kids lean about nature.
"Radical environmentalism is directly responsible for a huge part of this nations economic woes"....such as????
blabbering right wing psychos can't accept responsibility for timber markets or economics in general.
The mills did'nt close becuase of r enviros it you look at all the private mills in ME they're closing also becuase the demand is down.
Stop scapegoating any conservationists and take some responsibility.
NDD will continue as long as kids are plugged in excessively and only know nature as llogging roads and logged to hell USFS lands.
Interesting that a national level idea about connecting kids with the landscape where they live immediately becomes politically polarized. No matter what side of the political spectrum you live on, natural resources drive your economy, your culture, and probably much of your aesthetic and recreational well being. NCLI legislation is about helping kids connect with nature, whether that is a local athletic field, downtown river corridor, national park, wilderness area or their own backyard. Amazing things happen when kids play outside -- like getting to know their neighbors --including humans and other life forms, and being healthy and independent, and solving problems (without some talking head doing it for them). Those kids might even test the ideas of their parents off of each other and find that they have a lot more in common (like a neighborhood with plants and animals) and a lot more middle ground than they might know otherwise. I for one hope this movement strengthens so we all -- no matter our political stance -- come to appreciate our home ground a little bit more. Lord knows our country has some of the most amazing outdoors on the planet.
Comment By Dave Skinner, 2-05-10Yeah, I agree kids need to get away from Doom CXIV, but are these kids going to be taken to farms, ranches, fish hatcheries, oyster beds, forestry sites, mines, mills and the like to show how resources can be produced responsibly? Perhaps even sewage plants to show how you can take a leak and not kill the planet? To be made fully aware, and not just selectively so?
Looking at the sponsor list in Congress, I doubt it. It's the usual list of urban usual Democrat suspects with a scattering of RINOs.
But the part that bothers me the most goes back to NLCB....the reason for NLCB is that schools have gotten so diverted from the basic skill set that EVERYONE needs to fully function as an adult citizen. One needs to be able to make change without a cash register. One needs to be able to read and conceptualize the material read. One needs to be able to express oneself in properly-structured-and-spelled sentences.
Until kids are able to read, write, figure and think -- for themselves, thanks -- all the rest is just clutter. Period.
Let's have literacy in the fundamentals first. THEN take them out, to go out and get their water samples and admire wattle-throated billabongs and whatnot.
NCLI website: "This budget takes an important step toward boosting environmental education in the classroom and giving more kids the opportunity to get out and learn about the natural world around them," said Senator Jack Reed (RI)."
Bill Schneider:"It isn't even about teaching anything in classrooms."
Please Bill, one or the other.
Okay, Tom, I suppose you got me. Some money will go to classroom education, but the priority is, I'm sure, getting gets outside, even if it's into the local city park.....Bill
Comment By TomK, 2-05-10The public shool system has turned into little more than indoctrination centers, so when I see a program like this I become suspicious. What's wrong with getting kids involved in scouting? Or as I said earlier, just plain being a parent?
If we can't find time for our kids, maybe we need to sit down and seriously consider our priorities.
Parenting is not the job of the gov't or gov't paid teachers.
America was made great by taking responsibility for you and yours. If we do that we don't need gov't indoctrination programs.
Easier said than done. In most middle class and low income families both parents need to be working for the family to survive. And now that the economy as turned sour working families are under exponentially increased stress.
Comment By Tom Klumker, 2-05-10Mick,
Radical environmentalism is not science, far from it and propaganda at best and has no place in our classrooms. However true environmental science has a needed place in our kid's classrooms.
Problem is, who decides what's true environmental science?
Nobel prize climatologist Al Gore?
"The NCLI focuses specifically on enhancing environmental literacy through “formal” public K-12 education."
That scares me.
Adding environmental literacy (EL) to the current curricula does not mean people are trying to completely rewrite academic content standards. EL is interdisciplinary, and it's an enhancement to the 'basics everyone needs to know.' It's all interconnected anyway. In Ohio, our content standards already have this in our science and social studies model curricula. I think children deserve to know, for example, where our current sources of energy come from and how they're captured. Let them use scientific inquiry to understand the societal and environmental consequences of their choices. Environmental science has separate goals from environmentalism. ES uses the scientific method to study processes and systems. Ecology is the scientific study of relationships between organisms and and their environment.
From my experience (I'm 32), parents are disconnected from nature too, and the parents I know do not know enough about environmental science to 'teach' their children. I know countless children who are babysat by TVs and gaming systems. Where does all the ADD/ADHD come from? Hum...genetics, maybe?!
I agree, we need more responsible parenting, but I personally believe we need holistic teaching systems.
Again, kids need "literacy" in the fundamentals first and foremost, THEN they can be "holistic."
Doesn't do a heck of a lot of good to be connected to nature if you're not connected to reality, does it?
Define reality? What they learn from 'reality' TV shows or cyberspace? Does it matter if one can 'count change' if there's no natural resources to 'purchase?'
Comment By Mickey Garcia, 2-05-10Nature is reality if its presented truthfully without environmental spin.
Comment By AmyJ, 2-05-10How do you "spin" basic production, consumption, and distribution? Isn't that the basics of economics?
Comment By Mickey Garcia, 2-05-10I said nature is reality not economics. Economists like politicians disagree on just about everything. Nature is about what is really toxic or not? What level of harvesting is sustainable whether fish or trees? Is man really causing climate change or has climate change been going on since earth began? etc.
Comment By AmyJ, 2-05-10Mr. Garcia, I know what you meant. I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just pointing out that EL is complementary to what we already teach. I have a master's degree in marketing, and I have never once tried to spin anything about the natural world.
Comment By AmyJ, 2-05-10Or Ms. Garcia - whichever is applicable.
Comment By Mickey Garcia, 2-05-10Look, I'm all for Environmental Outdoor Education as long as its fair and balanced, unlike FOX. Take what both sides say with a grain of salt. Both sides of any environmental debate are not above stretching the truth.
Comment By Todd, 2-07-10The first thing to getting kids out is to knock off the idea of making everything wilderness. That eliminates ordinary folks who have maybe oen day off together and could drive to a creek to fish or picnic or hike, but cannot drive miles and miles to hike more miles to get to the same creek.
Teh next thing is to get the professional fund raisers out of the teaching business. They may be non profits, but they want to rule what and how.
My grandson (now in the USN) was in elementary school when the wolves were hauled in, he came to my house after school one day and was telling me how the ranchers were trying to take homes away from the wolves etc etc. Fortunately he had a 4-H lamb & they have always had horses, so I was able to relate how the ranchers feel about their animals being killed about wolves to how he would feel about is. Also teach him that the wolves were brought in, they didn't live here. A granddaughter a little younger was out scouting the sage grouse lek with me and was telling me how there should be no roads, and people were pushing wildlife out of their homes. So we discussed how her Daddy would get to work without roads, how we could check the lek without them, how they could get food, and where they would live if they did not have a house. Environmentalism is the only religion that can be taught in school and it is.
Make access easier for folks and save the money.
only you toad could turn this into a rant against wilderness and wolves.
"Also teach him that the wolves were brought in, they didn't live here."
you have soo much to teach the youngsters toad.
Mickey you think anyone who supports roadless areas is an radical enviro. perhaps your the radical.
Comment By TomK, 2-08-10Do we want people like Lesley in the class room teaching our children "real science"? Irrational emotionaly driven rants and name calling just don't seem very scientific.
They walk among us. And some of them are teachers and even college professors. The prospects are frightening.
I'm irrational and emotional look at toad's completely off topic comments.
Wolves were naturally migrating back to MT
So we should teach them that wolves never existed before the feds brought em back
you right wing crazies are too much.
You just assume anyone who supports wilderness/roadless wants all public land to be wilderness and is a radical.
You people are the radicals who can only rant and rave about anti-wilderness and anti-predator even on a thread that is dealing with NDD.
Do we really want people like Tom K and toad teaching our children that Wolves never existed in the rockies before the feds brought them in. Do we want them teaching them that we need more roads in our forests and prairies (despite a backlog in maintainance on current roads) and that we need to log our last roadless/old growth forests when we already have more than we can handle second growth/third growth etc.
I think the kids are catching on that the old ways are'nt going to cut it anymore and it pisses off all these right wing crazy commentators here who resist change more than anything.
I want to preface this by disclosing that I have a background in forestry, soil science AND education. I hunt, fish, AND backpack in Wilderness areas. I've also been involved with environmental education (EE) for 20 years.
The goal of environmental literacy (EL) is to develop a citizenry that lives their lives based on a strong understanding of ecology and the human connection to those ecosystems. We can't survive without well functioning ecosystems and we can't chat on computers without using natural resources.
One important tool for developing EL is to provide kids with outdoor learning experiences. This does not detract from learning the basics. In fact, the research is very, very clear: well implemented EE significantly improves student achievement in reading, writing, and math.
That said, there is a real concern that EE is often promoted by those with a preservation agenda. Real EE does not include a bias towards any one value such as preservation or consumption, instead it shines a light on the diversity of values surrounding the environment, and promotes individual critical thinking rather than following the herd.
Mike,
The theory is fine. But let's not forget the practice, for example the "Story of Stuff" or whatever that vid was.
Literacy would include the ability to punch numbers to determine the physical footprint of a solar farm, its watt hours, the materials used, in comparison to coal, gas, demand cycles. That's all basic functional LITERACY.
Here's something I find rather ILLiterate. City of WF is installing a solar heat thingie at the new cop and fire shop. Unclue (not a typo) Sam is paying for most out of STIMULUS funds. Quarter million.
Solar? In Whitefish, Cloud Central Montana? Since winter started, we've had perhaps two days of "solar" radiation. I cannot imagine in my wildest dreams that the solar capacity will pay for its own installation. No freaking way.
And that is freaking ILLITERATE. I don't want kids coming out of school predisposed to this sort of shyte.
Real education that teaches a solid understanding of the subject without indoctrinating students in a political adgenda is very rare if existent at all in public schools today.
Real education would be similar to what Todd did with his grand children. Get them outside, engage them in converation and get them to think for themselves about both sides of the issue.
unfortunately, hysterical liberals can't even stand to see that in a family unit. How do you think it would go over in the public school system?
"Real education would be similar to what Todd did with his grand children. Get them outside, engage them in converation and get them to think for themselves about both sides of the issue."
by telling them that wolves never existed in the rockies before the feds brought em in, and indoctrinating them with all the typical right wing crazy myhts and lies.
Your a complete partisan "hysterical hack."
Public schools are not that biased Tom YOU are.
Mike, does environmental literacy include being able to grow at least a portion of one's food? How about canning, preserving, freezing what one grows? Does it also deal with the carbon footprint required by those who are pushing environmental ideas. For instance I am totally blown away that anyone would fly a private jet to talk about saving the environment. think of the carbon footprint of the flight and all of the folks who come to hear the talk. Teach them to think of all of the ramifications of what is done in the name of saving the environment.
It seems to me that it is time to do a lot of this stuff by teleconferencing instead of meetings. The carbon footprint of Copenhagen was equal to more than an annual output of some countries. That is really dumb in my opinion. And that does not even deal with the cost.
As a matter of fact I think it is time for our lawmakers to stay home and be accessible to their constituents and have their meetings via teleconferencing. The money, hot air, and carbon footprint that would be saved would be tremendous.
As for solar, I thought it would be great, then I bought a little solar light for the back step of my camper so I could see. First snow that piled up on it took care of it's ability to charge.
With the added restriction of "no-touch buffers" in critical areas, we find in our rural county that landowners are not allowed to use and enjoy large segments of their land. On shorelines, grassy buffers are discouraged, even though that is the best management practice for the roadways to help prevent run-off into streams. It seems like we have a lot of conflicting regulations to this program. If we want childrent to learn about the environment, why are they kept separate from it, except in managed parks?
This article was printed from www.newwest.net at the following URL: http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/progress_made_in_against_nature_deficit_disorder_but_not_enough/C41/L41/