Chapter 4: Indiana and the Environment

[ draft version comments appreciated]  Catherine Kavassalis       Return to Contents    Return to BioMuncie

last revision: 11/24/2002

Sections:

• Environmentalism in Indiana
• The State of the Environment
• Environmental Education in Indiana
• Conclusions

Environmentalism in Indiana

Most of those venturing into the "new" land wished to "tame" it, to exploit its varied riches, to impose "civilization" upon it. Thus, the move west may be seen as both a moralistic and physical attack on nature. Carrying their tools, possessions and beliefs, they set forth on trails they envisioned as roads, pushed forward into the forests they hoped to cut away to reveal towns. (Conner Prairie, n.d., “Introduction to Taming the Wilderness.”)

Historically the wilderness of modern day Indiana was viewed as something to be tamed - a view held across the American frontier. From these roots, the modern perception of the natural environment has evolved. Today most Hoosiers (an odd term of unknown origin used to denote residents of Indiana, Carmony, 1992), see the environment as a resource to be managed. While other states have created Environmental Protection Agencies (e.g. Illinois, California, Florida), Indiana created the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. This agency, along with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), oversees environmental issues. The language used to title these agencies evidences the underlying attitude, which is rooted in early American conservationism. Echoing the sentiments of Gifford Pinchot, the DNR's current director John Gross recently commented, "[Despite reductions in funding] Our mission won't change. And you can be sure that we will always protect our natural resources, provide for recreation and manage our public lands for the benefit of the resources and the public,” (2002, ¶ 10). The language is reflective of the culture and dominant ethos in the state. However other voices are present too.

 The preservationist movement can be heard in the language of the Indiana Code establishing Nature Preserves: IC 14-31-1-1. This legislation encodes the multiple reasons to protect and preserve wilderness areas:  

The language expresses the kind of preservationism espoused by John Muir. This statement makes clear that some untouched lands have value to people and therefore should be protected.

Preservationists and conservationists are not alone. Less anthropocentric groups also make their presence known. Heartwood is an association of forest activists that formed in the early 90s in southern Indiana to stop logging.

They sought to remind the region's inhabitants of their common forest heritage, to replace an ethic of waste and exploitation with one of reverence and care, and to protect their forest home without regard to the arbitrary political and administrative boundaries that have been imposed on the land. (n.d., p.1)

This group evokes Aldo Leopold's land ethic and is one of several Indiana groups belonging to the Orion Network. All members of this network are concerned with re-imagining humanity's relationship to nature. In addition to the ecocentric movement, there are a number of animal welfare organizations working in Indiana. In July of 2000, a member of the militant Animal Liberation Front set fire to a feed truck at a chicken farm in North Vernon, Indiana scrawling, "Polluter, animal exploiter, your turn to pay," on a farm wall (Protest.net, 2000, ¶ 2). This is not typical however. Several less extreme groups such as CHACE (Connecting Hoosiers for Animal Concerns and Education) and the Bloomington Student Chapter of the Animal Legal Defense Fund work within the system to protect animals from abuse and promote animal rights.

A variety of environmentalists work within the state to protect the environment and there are dozens of small grassroots organizations across the state each with their own unique perspective. The missions of these groups range from addressing local issues, like saving a particular habitat or preventing a power plant from being built in a particular location, to solving more global problems - like reducing ozone depletion or preventing the global destruction of forests. Many environmental groups are connected with national or international organizations. The Sierra Club, the Audubon Society, the Isaak Walton League, the Nature Conservancy, the Green Movement, and the Wildlife Federation are a few of those represented with a Web presence in Indiana. Thus, within the state there is evidence of a wide range of environmental philosophies, although that of the conservationists predominates.

The State of the Environment  [return to top]

In his submission for the 2001 State of the Environment Report, Governor Frank O'Bannon echoed Roosevelt's desire to preserve the environment for unborn people. "Our environment presents new challenges and places more responsibilities on Hoosiers to protect it, not only for themselves, but also for future generations,” (2001, ¶ 1). Indiana is faced with a legacy of industrial pollution, poorly managed urban development, poor waste management practices, and unsustainable agricultural practices. In 1986, in light of these problems and federal regulations, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) was established along with state legislation to work on amelioration and also to prevent further damage to the environment. Although, significant progress has been made to improve and protect the air, land and water, the State of the Environment Report indicates there is a long way to go:

Indiana's increasing population and expanding economy are placing unprecedented pressure on the state's land base. Urban sprawl - particularly the paving of large segments of land - is significantly impacting Indiana's landscape and the condition of our natural resources. (Indiana Land Resource Council, 2000, p. 43)

The waters and streams within the state show damage from a variety of sources of pollution. Twenty four percent of the streams and rivers tested will not support aquatic life (IDEM, 2001a).

In the 1700s, wetlands covered 25 percent of the total area of Indiana. By the late 1980s, over 4.7 million acres of wetlands had been lost - wetlands now cover less than 4 percent of Indiana. This means that more than 85 percent of our original wetlands have been drained or filled. (IDEM, 2001a, p.39)

Convincing farmers and to a lesser extent developers not to drain or fill wetlands is an ongoing battle. A 1985 amendment to the Food Security Act called 'swampbuster' tried to encourage farmers to conserve wetlands. However the Farm Bureau lobbied intensively and in 1996, the act was severely limited in its effectiveness (National Wildlife Federation, 2002). Although IDEM is trying to mitigate the problem and create new wetlands, this is an uphill battle in a state whose economy is strongly tied to agriculture. This is only one of the many environmental concerns within the states. Unacceptable levels of ozone, smog, dust and toxic chemicals have been detected in the air in certain regions (IDEM, 2001b). Poor waste management practices have resulted in contaminated lands, and contaminated water. There are literally thousands of known contaminated properties requiring cleanup. "Others are yet to be discovered," (IDEM, 2001c, p.24).

There is general agreement that something must be done and serious efforts have begun, but as Gifford Pinchot observed, "Conservation was universally accepted until it began to be applied." Changing long-term behaviours and convincing people to accept the costs associated with environmental protection and improvement is difficult. Education is key. Indiana is just beginning to recognize the need for statewide environmental education.

Environmental Education in Indiana               [return to top]

Oakhurst Gardens is a small nature centre located in Delaware County, Indiana. It is typical of many small facilities around the state with a general mission: "to promote awareness, understanding, and appreciation of our natural environment." This year at Oakhurst Gardens, it was possible to learn how to sex and tag a monarch butterfly, learn about Johnny Appleseed, or learn why trees change colour. These brief 'one-off' environmental programs are the norm for environmental education in the state. Environmental education in Indiana is largely nonformal. A nonformal program is one that learners choose to attend (Heimlich, 1993). Numerous government agencies and organizations are working to improve the status of environmental education, but the state lacks the necessary infrastructure and funding to support the coordination of formal statewide programming.

In 2000, the National Environmental Education Advancement Project, NEEAP, identified what they believed to be the necessary components of a comprehensive statewide environmental education program. 

Components of a State-level Comprehensive EE Program (NEEAP)
Structure Components State EE Master Plan EE Board or Advisory Council State EE Office State-level EE centers/regional offices State interagency committee State EE association Online Database of EE Resources State Curriculum/Resource Guides Annual EE Conference		Program Components K-12 EE Instruction Requirements EE Guidelines/Standards (EE Correlations to State Content Standards) State Assessment that includes EE Coordinated Teacher Inservice Programs EE Training for Preservice Teachers EE Training for Teacher Educators (University Faculty) (Nonformal Providers) EE Training for Nonformal Educators EE Model or Resource Schools
	Funding Components Fees, Fines, Taxes and Lottery General Revenue Public/Private Grants and Donations EE Grants Program

As of 1998, NEEAP noted that Indiana had some components in place: a state plan; a statewide environmental education association, some train-the-trainers programs, an annual EE conference, state-wide EE workshops, and some funding sources for EE (“Indiana,” n.p.). Although this appears to be a promising beginning, many of the components are only loosely in place and Indiana is far from having the critical mass necessary for a comprehensive statewide environmental education program.

In 1996, the Indiana Conservation Education Working Group, ICE, drafted a Comprehensive Environmental Education Implementation Plan for Indiana. Citing the "staggering" costs of environmental ignorance, the authors called for increased funding and statewide prioritization of environmental education. They also recommended the creation of an Environmental Education Office to provide for centralized access to materials and coordination of the various agencies and organizations that are engaged in or are supportive of environmental education across the state. These include the Indiana Department of Education, the Indiana Professional Standards Board, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Environmental Management, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, the State Board of Education, colleges and universities, and private sector organizations. They made specific recommendations for each of these organizational bodies regarding such things as curriculum development, student development, staff development, and staff licensure. If implemented, the plan would result in a substantive statewide environmental education program. However, the plan has no formal standing and although published five years ago was unknown to many individuals that I contacted in the field.

Formal education initiatives are limited. There is no legislation in Indiana requiring environmental education to be taught in schools beyond learning about "the living environment" as part of the general science curriculum. Teacher certification does not require an understanding of environmental education and few teachers have the necessary training to implement an environmental education program. As a result, only 30% of teachers manage to integrate environmental topics into their teaching (ICE, 1996). Hopefully, this will improve given recent changes in the science curriculum.

The Indiana Department of Education is in the process of revising the science curriculum. New science standards, contained in Science for All Indiana Students (2002), have been drawn from the AAAS publication Benchmarks for Science Literacy. As discussed earlier, these standards only weakly support environmental education unless they are embedded in the context presented by Science for All Americans and Blueprints for Reform. The Science Course description prepared by the Indiana DOE includes some of this critical context:

To what extent this new curriculum encourages teachers to incorporate EE into their programs remains to be seen. Making the critical connection between science, society and the environment is an important step toward a more integrated curriculum.

Unfortunately, as on the national level, the Department of Education has until recently been largely uninterested in environmental education - it has simply been outside their mandate. Responsibility for EE has fallen on the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the Department of Natural Resources. Mirroring the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior (which oversees: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the United States Geological Survey etc.), IDEM and DNR each tries to provide some support and leadership in environmental education. During a phone conversation with Chad Trinkle, Environmental Education Coordinator for IDEM's Office of Planning and Assessment (April 18, 2002), he explained that IDEM focuses on preventative environmental education, whereas the DNR focuses on conservation education. They both provide "non-regulatory based outreach to children pre K-12 and limited adult audiences,” (IDEM, 2002, ¶ 1). These are made available upon request to schools and organizations. Although beneficial, these types of nonformal efforts have limited scope and impact.

Growing interagency cooperation between the DNR, IDEM and the Department of Education bodes well for improved programming and coordination of efforts. IDEM has been working with several school districts to develop a program called Project LEAP (Learning and Environmental Awareness Partnership, 2001).Project LEAP includes outdoor hands-on programs and classroom kits that correlate with curriculum standards. They currently offer a comprehensive AIR module for all grade levels and are working to produce water, land and ecosystem modules. Through an environment education grant from the US EPA, 200 teachers have been trained to use LEAP materials. Although not a huge number, it is a positive step. In addition, the DNR has been coordinating efforts to correlate the outcomes of several environmental programs with state curricular standards. These include such programs as Project Learning Tree, Project WILD, Project WET, Hoosier Riverwatch and Go FishIN. In addition, they are also providing workshops and training for teachers across the state. Both the correlation of programs with curricular standards and the establishment of training programs are critical steps towards the establishment of a comprehensive statewide program.

When asked via email about his perception of environmental education efforts in Indiana, Sam Carman, Education Director of the Forestry Division of Indiana's DNR and Chairman of ICE, responded with cautious optimism.

We now have a Natural Resources Education Center (NREC) that houses 5 of our state's leading EE efforts (Project Learning Tree, Project WILD, Project WET, Hoosier Riverwatch and Go FishIN.) ... We also have a very active state EE association and many, many workshops and projects being supported by both public and private organizations. The reason I qualify my optimism with caution is because EE is still not funded to the degree it should be; is not recognized as the priority that it should be; and is sometimes used as a means to advocate a particular position on various issues, which it should not be. But I don't think these concerns are unique to Indiana. (Personal communication, April 8, 2002)

The state EE association to which Sam Carman referred is the Environmental Education Association of Indiana, EEAI. This organization promotes "opportunities that will educate, motivate, and inspire citizens of Indiana to conserve natural resources and meet the needs of our society while maintaining a healthy environment now and in the future,” (2001, “Our Mission”). Through regional and statewide meetings and through publication of a regular newsletter, they provide educators the opportunities to network and share resources. In addition they facilitate statewide conferences and training programs. Their efforts, and efforts of similar organizations, have helped to increase the profile of environmental education in the state. Like most volunteer organizations, however, its effectiveness is dependent on the time and abilities of the individuals spearheading the various initiatives and heavily constricted by the availability of funding.

Conservation education and prevention education dominate the environmental education landscape in Indiana. From the proposed master plan produced by ICE, to the mission of the EEAI, the view of the environment as a resource is promoted. The need for environmental education is often defined in relation to its economic benefit. ICE, for instance, motivates the need for its Comprehensive Plan by providing case studies where individuals and businesses incurred financial costs because of 'environmental negligence or ignorance'.  For instance, in Case study #1:

A coal company and its bonding company both went bankrupt, leaving hundreds of acres of mine land unreclaimed for several years while state and federal authorities tried to work out a solution. The land was eventually reclaimed using fees from current mining companies to finance the expense. In the end, these costs were past on to the consumer. (p. 3)

The fact that environmental cleanup costs everyone is used to motivate prevention education, although in this instance it is unclear whether the dilemma could have been prevented through education.

In addition, for instance, state supported projects intended for formal education are conservative. The online descriptions of the Indiana versions of Project Wild, Project Wild and Project Learning Tree stress their complementary or supplementary nature and conservation focus:

• Project WET activities are designed to satisfy the goals of educational programs by complementing existing curricula rather than displacing or adding more concepts. (Schultz, n.d., “Background”).
• Project WILD is a supplementary environmental/conservation education program emphasizing wildlife. (DNR Division of Fish and Wildlife, n.d.a, ¶ 1).
• Under Project Learning Tree is an example of a demonstration forest, with the caption: "a small-scale version of a working forest that demonstrates techniques of forest management," (DNR Division of Forestry, n.d.).

  The cultural emphasis on conservation is apparent. In addition, there is little emphasis on the benefits of these programs. It is not at all clear that they aim to build new concepts in order, "to create new patterns of behavior of individuals, groups and society as a whole towards the environment" -- a goal drawn from the Tbilisi Declaration and specified by the NAAEE in their guidelines for excellence in environmental education. These information bites try to convey the message that these programs are neither additional work nor controversial in nature, perhaps because teachers have not been receptive to inclusion of environmental education programming.

  According to the Environmental Education Teacher Survey, 60% of teachers are unaware of these and several other state supported programs. Most teachers simply do not want to integrate EE into their instruction (ICE, 1996, p.23). One has to wonder why they would be inclined to add a "supplementary" program or a program with "no more concepts" to their curriculum. It is unfortunate that these environmental programs do not focus on the educational merits of using hands-on science education for building science concepts, or that these programs will help children to learn the skills and concepts necessary to "make choices affecting the preservation or reclamation of the environment.” Now that this statement is explicit in the new science curriculum, perhaps more teachers will be willing to expand their portfolios.

  There are environmental programs in the state that focus on more than conservation education and include preservation education and the building of environmental values. One example would be Merry Lea Environmental Learning Center of Goshen College. Both teacher training programs and student activities are designed to "foster an understanding of interconnectedness, a sense of place, and a delight in nature," (“Programs Reflect Educational Values,” 2001, p.1). Their education coordinator references Aldo Leopold and the development of environmental values. In addition, the Indiana Department of Education's Center for School Improvement and Performance developed an integrated environmental education program in 1993. In fact the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse selected their Completing the Cycle program as an exemplar for Mathematics and Science Education in 1995. Designed for elementary classrooms, this program provides cross-curricular activities that give students opportunities “to study the relationships between behaviors and consequences, and to increase students' awareness of their own abilities to bring about change related to environmental issues such as conservation, preservation, ecology, resource management, solid waste, and recycling (Indiana Deparment of Education, 1993, cited by Eisenhower National Clearinghouse, n.d., “Abstract”). These are just two examples of many that push the envelope of environmental understanding. They are, however, in the minority.

  
  Conclusions                                    [return to top]

  There is no question that serious environmental problems exist in Indiana. Although environmental education is seen as part of the solution, it has not yet become part of mainstream education. There are many excellent initiatives but they are scattered across the state. Without legislation, improved funding, or adequate teacher training, environmental education is likely to remain a kind of supplemental program offered here and there where individual interest drives its implementation and nonformal providers will continue to be the main source of environmental education initiatives.

  In order for environmental education to become part of mainstream programming a cultural change has to occur. In order for cultural change to occur, people in Indiana need greater access to conversations about the environment that include new ways of speaking and thinking about environmental issues and environmental education. The famous psychologist Lev Vygotsky commented, "Words play a central part not only in the development of thought but in the historical growth of consciousness as a whole. A word is a microcosm of human consciousness (Vygotsky, 1962/1934, chapter 7, sect. VI, ¶ 14). Whereas the early settlers in Indiana spoke of the land as something to be tamed and civilized, now it has become something to be controlled and managed. The environment is viewed primarily as an economic resource for people. Conversations about preservation are limited. The language used does not reflect the view of people as an integral part of a complex ecological system dependent on the environment for sustenance, protection and energy.  The necessity of understanding this relationship and teaching about this relationship has not permeated the social consciousness. Environmental education therefore exists primarily as a conservation-oriented or prevention-oriented effort, usually in the form of singular one-off programs or interventions.

  Access to information that encourages dialogue about the ethics of land use, aesthetics of natural spaces, the social construction of environmental attitudes and behaviours along with discussions of the science of ecosystems, may help to stimulate change. By introducing new concepts, for instance biodiversity, and talking about why it’s important to maintain biodiversity it may be possible to broaden the social consciousness. By educating the public about the impact of environmental problems, it may also be possible to raise greater support for environmental education and usher it into the mainstream of institutionalized education. Clearly changes are happening and a new dialogue has begun. BioMuncie is part of that new dialogue which will lead to the evolution of a new environmental consciousness.

      The ecosystem is evolving

              New seeds are planted.

                      What climax community will form?

                              The dialogue has begun.

                                      New words are introduced.

                                                  The end of the conservation is unknown. 

   

  [return to top]