integrating policy and land management issues into a ... · between policy and the natural system...

ABSTRACTThe Environmental Sciences Program at NorthernArizona University developed an interdisciplinary fieldcourse combining natural sciences (geology, biology,and chemistry), policy and land management centeredon a place-based set of problems. The course consists of acampus-based semester of study of scientific,management, and political issues surrounding the lowerSan Juan River basin of southeastern Utah. Students thenspend eight days on the river conducting scientificstudies and discussing their management and policyimplications.

The desired learning outcome of the course is forstudents to be able to integrate complex environmentalfield data, and the course structure and evaluationcriteria emphasize this. Students work in large and smallgroups on problems that combine geomorphology,geochemistry, and ecology, such as stream terraces, soils,and the plant communities they support, soildevelopment and chemistry under native andnon-native vegetation, and biological soil crusts and soildevelopment in arid lands. Discussions on themanagement and political implications of the students'findings give a "real-world" relevance to their work.Conducting a field class on a remote river presents anumber of difficulties and opportunities. River logisticsare handled by a commercial outfitter so professors canconcentrate on academic issues.

INTRODUCTIONField education gives students the opportunity todevelop their abilities both to think in four dimensions(space plus time) and to go through the process ofiterative decision-making. The development of theseskills is critical for students who intend to work in theareas of geology and environmental sciences. AtNorthern Arizona University (NAU), the EnvironmentalSciences program developed its current field-orientedcurriculum about a decade ago, relying on 3-hour labsduring the week and weekend-long field trips. Studentslearned techniques and how to think in four dimensions,but, due to the typically short duration of their fieldprojects, did not experience the full iterative process bywhich studies are conceived, designed, and carried out.We decided to develop a longer field course that allowsstudents to delve deeper into questions, and more fullyunderstand the connections between different naturalscience disciplines (e.g. biology, chemistry, geology) aswell as between the natural and social sciences (e.g.communications, education, political science). Ourlearning goal was for the students to develop a high levelof sophistication in their integration of data from

different subject areas and to understand the connectionbetween policy and the natural system they study.

Conceptual Basis For The Course - Two of the threeauthors participated in the Science and Education forNew Civic Engagements and Responsibilities (SENCER)2002 Summer Institute. The SENCER model is "to teach'through' complex, capacious, unresolved public issues'to' the basic science required to comprehend them"(Flower, 2000; SENCER, 2005). Several of the SENCERcourses served as models for the development of anextended field course. The "Chemistry and theEnvironment" (Schacter, 2002) and the "Energy and theEnvironment" (Jordan, 2002) SENCER models areexemplary courses that emphasize problem-orientedapproaches to a variety of environmental problems.Schacter (2002) uses a group organizational approach toaddress community-based environmental issuesthrough student-driven scientific research projects.Jordan (2002) uses "contemporary environmental issuesas a framework for introducing foundationalprinciples…" and explores how these issues are relatedto public policy through class discussions, in-classproblem solving, and group research projects.

These approaches are readily adaptable to anextended field course because they areproblem-oriented, inquiry-based, and integrate localenvironmental issues. By choosing local issues andresearch sites, students have the opportunity to enjoyboth problem-based learning (solving real-worldproblems) and inquiry-based learning (designing andconducting their own investigations), both methodsconsidered to be effective at enhancing scientific literacy(Siebert and McIntosh, 2001).

Additionally, we hoped this course would helpstudents understand the necessary interaction betweenscience and policy. Therefore, the field area needed tohave significant scientific and policy issues. Water servesas the nexus for most environmental sciences and policyin the southwestern USA. The lower San Juan River,located about 300 km northeast of NAU (Figure 1), is aperennial stream with a great number of relevantscientific and policy issues. As a teaching field area, theSan Juan River corridor provides a combination ofextraordinary geological features, environmentalgradients, a long history of occupation, and a variety ofmodern land use practices and jurisdictions.

NAU Environmental Sciences - NAU is a publiclyassisted university with about 13,000 undergraduatestudents and 6,000 graduate students. NAU has a largeminority undergraduate population, primarily NativeAmericans and Hispanic Americans, many of whomcome from, and often return to, a rural or a reservationcommunity. About 40 Environmental Science majors

116 Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, n. 2, March, 2006, p. 116-122

Integrating Policy and Land Management Issues into a NaturalSciences Education: Teaching Environmental Sciences on thelower San Juan River, UtahMichael H. Ort Center for Environmental Sciences and Education, PO Box 5694, Northern

Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011 [email protected]

Diana E. Anderson Center for Environmental Sciences and Education, PO Box 5694, NorthernArizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011

David M. Ostergren Center for Environmental Sciences and Education, PO Box 5694, NorthernArizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011

graduate per year. Most continue in environmentalfields; many go into entry-level jobs in environmentalmanagement (e.g. US Forest Service), while others seekfurther training in graduate school. Our current cohort offulltime undergraduate Environmental Science majorsincludes 8.0% Native American, 8.8% Hispanic/Latino,and 1.2% Black or African American students, and is 52%female and 48% male.

The Center for Environmental Sciences andEducation at NAU houses an undergraduate degree inEnvironmental Sciences and an MS degree inEnvironmental Sciences and Policy. The EnvironmentalSciences undergraduate curriculum at NAU includes afour-course core sequence, followed by a thesis orinternship and a research presentation course. Thecourses concentrate on ecology, applied geology, andenvironmental chemistry, returning to subjects at higherconceptual levels several times over the two-yearsequence. Policy is introduced as a component of the firstthree courses in the core curriculum and is about half ofthe content in the last core course ("Energy, Resources,and Policy"). Laboratory sections concentrate onfield-based research, typically combining field work tomap, describe, and gather samples with laboratoryanalysis of the samples. Most important problems inenvironmental sciences are interdisciplinary in nature.For example, understanding climate change requiresresearch in geology, chemistry, and physics. Waterquality studies typically involve geology, biology, andchemistry. The goal of the environmental sciencescurriculum at NAU is to help students learn to studyinterdisciplinary problems and work with researcherswith diverse scientific specialties. Since the professorscome from traditional disciplinary backgrounds, thecourses are co-taught in a multi-disciplinary fashion,

with the goal that graduates will think in a trulyinterdisciplinary fashion, thus surpassing their teachers.

While the students are completing the corecurriculum, they also complete courses in one of eightemphasis areas (biology, geology, chemistry,management, policy, communication, microbiology,mathematics). These emphasis course sets are selectionsof environmentally relevant courses that constitute mostof the major in the emphasis area. Throughout the corecourses, group work in class and in the field tends tocreate groups with a wide range of 'emphasis' talentstackling an equally wide range of environmentalproblems. There are always some students who are"expert" in a subject area and can lead others who areoutside of their academic "comfort zone". As the subjectareas vary, most students get a chance to be the expert.

COURSE DESCRIPTIONThe NAU San Juan River field course (officially"Environmental Sciences of the San Juan River Basin")was developed in Spring semester, 2003, to help studentsactively integrate the broad spectrum of disciplines thatprovide the foundation of environmental research. Thecourse consists of weekly sessions during which studentsand faculty discuss a wide variety of currentenvironmental issues related to the San Juan Riverecosystem, followed by an eight-day, 83-mile raft trip onthe lower San Juan River to carry out interdisciplinaryresearch.

Setting - The project study area is a stretch of the SanJuan River through the canyonlands region of theColorado Plateau in southern Utah. The trip and studyarea begin at Sand Island (1310 meters above sea level -"masl") near Bluff, Utah, and ends at Clay Hills Crossing(1130 masl), where the river drains into Lake Powell(Figure 1). The climate of the study area is semiarid, butfreezing winter temperatures limit the field season toApril through October. The river cuts through strata,predominantly limestone and sandstone, that are foldedto form several spectacular monocline pairs, allowingstudents to gain a dramatic three-dimensional view ofgeologic structures (Kearsley, 2002). The main-stem SanJuan River and its major tributaries also include severalflights of late Pleistocene and Holocene fluvial terraces.The riparian community varies from narrow gorges toopen flood plains, providing a wide variety of settingsfor study. Several different land management agenciescontrol the river and the lands on either side of it. Thelower San Juan River is technically easy (class II, withtwo class III rapids; Kearsley, 2002), so students canconcentrate on the science but have fun in two-personinflatable kayaks as they travel down river.

Flowing from the San Juan Mountains in Colorado toLake Powell, a reservoir created by the Glen CanyonDam in 1961, the San Juan River has a rich environmentaland cultural history. The archaeological record extendsback to 10,000 - 9,000 BCE (Before Common Era) whenClovis Hunters roamed the area (Aton and McPherson,2000). The San Juan River provided an importanthydrologic and agricultural resource during Anasazioccupation up until 1300 CE (Common Era), whenregional populations declined. Navajo, Paiute, and UteIndian tribes settled the nearby regions prior to 1500 CE.Mormon pioneers began establishing settlements in thearea in the mid-nineteenth century. Each populationexerted a different magnitude and type of pressure onthe river, a process that continues today.

117 Journal of Geoscienc Education, v. 54, n. 2, March, 2006

Figure 1. Map of the lower San Juan River. Insetshows the location of the San Juan River within theColorado River basin.

Course Details - The Environmental Sciences of the SanJuan River Basin was taught for the first time in spring,2003, with a class of twenty-two Environmental Sciencesstudents and was repeated in spring, 2004. The courseallows students to carry out a comprehensive study of"place" (Gruenewald, 2003), similar to many professionalenvironmental research projects, under the guidance ofan interdisciplinary group of faculty including a

geologist, a geomorphologist, two biologists, ageoarchaeologist, and a political scientist. Two or threeprofessors are on the river portion of the course at anygiven time, with a switch-out of professors occurring atthe mid-point (the only opportunity). One professorcoordinates the class and stays for the entire trip.

The overall goals of the course were to develop thestudents' ability to effectively integrate several differentaspects of environmental sciences across disciplines, aswell as across different spatial and temporal scales.Specific topics to be integrated include geology,geomorphology, environmental policy, hydrology,aqueous geochemistry, river ecology, exotic species, andland management.

The course consisted of two main components, aweekly two-hour meeting during the Spring semester tobuild a foundation in the topics listed above, and a rivertrip during which this foundation was applied to specificresearch projects. Class meetings during the Springsemester included lectures by the instructors and otheruniversity and community guest speakers. These topicsincluded an overview of the geology of the region, fluvialgeomorphology, the downstream effects of dams, localgeoarchaeology, riparian ecosystems, ethnobotany,archaeology, subsistence and drought, landmanagement and policy, journaling and note-takingtechniques, and wilderness first aid. Students also readchapters from Aton and MacPherson (2000) River Flowingfrom the Sunrise: An Environmental History of the Lower SanJuan, as well as assigned articles and policy documents.

The eight-day river trip occurred immediately afterthe end of the Spring semester. While on the river,students carried out research in two organizationalstructures: a class research project and smaller groupprojects. Both allowed students to participate incollaborative, team-oriented learning, participating inboth informal learning groups (ad hoc temporaryclusters of students) during the class research project,and in formal learning groups (teams established tocomplete a specific task) during the smaller groupprojects (Davis, 2001). The class project was designed bythe instructors to follow many of the same protocols andresearch questions that students had experienced in labsthroughout their Environmental Sciences curriculum.The small-group projects were added in 2004 and wereconceived and designed by students during the Springsemester. They required tools and techniques beyondthose they had experienced during their previouscourses.

Research Projects - The class project focused on 1) thedevelopment of stream terraces along the main-stemlower San Juan River and selected tributaries and 2) thesoil development and plant communities on these streamterraces. Students also evaluated the chemistry of thewaters in the main stem and tributaries. This project,carried out during the first three days of the trip, allowedstudents to practice designing and modifyingexperimental protocols in the field while familiarizingthemselves with the San Juan River environment.Hypotheses for the class projects included:

• Different fluvial terraces would host different plantcommunities due to substrate characteristics and toproximity to the local alluvial aquifer.

• Plant communities in different tributaries would varydepending on the level of grazing occurring in thewatershed.

• Geochemistry of main-stem water would reflectcontributions of tributaries.


Figure 2. a) Impromptu lectures and discussionsoccur each day. Here, the discussion is on rangemanagement and desertification; b) Students presenttheir field data in the field; c) Students direct waterchemistry studies using field analytical equipment(here with pH and conductivity meters).

During the class project, students learned to describesoil sections and to identify many types of plants, theirniches, and how they related to the various substrates,water availability, and land management practices.Students identified and quantified native and alienspecies abundance, and soon recognized the significanceof these within the ecosystem. Meanwhile, theycharacterized water sources, using chemical compositionto track where it has been and how it has arrived to thetributaries or main stem. Every afternoon, the studentsshared their data and switched groups to practicedifferent techniques. Hikes up side canyons allowedstudents to observe non-riparian areas and elicitedimpromptu lectures on mesoscale meteorology,structural geology, cultural history or land managementpolicy.

In 2004, students took the lead in exploring potentialresearch questions, and groups of 2-3 studentsdeveloped and refined their research protocols (firstdeveloped as part of the pre-trip exam; see below) underthe advisement of a faculty mentor. These small-groupresearch questions and protocols were further refined asdata were collected and interpreted. Small-groupresearch project topics included 1) the effects ofbiological soil crusts on soil development and surfacestability, 2) the effect of native and non-native vegetationon insect and bird populations, 3) the relations betweensoil type, soil chemistry, and plant species, and 4) theeffects of campsite use on soils and plants. Some researchquestions that guided the projects included:

• What are the effects of land use on the viability ofbiological soil crusts?

• How do soil profiles and chemistry vary on differentterraces and associated with different native and alienvegetation?

• What is the effect of the invasive species Tamarix onsoil chemistry?

• What are some of the recreational impacts along theSan Juan River?

• What is the sediment load of the San Juan River? Doesit change downstream?

Data were collected and analyzed for each of theseprojects, and the results have been compiled so thatstudents in future years can build upon the research ofearlier students. We expect that future students willanswer, alter, and/or discard some of these researchquestions while adding some of their own.

We were recently funded to buy several field notebookcomputers in order to incorporate GIS into the course.These computers are shock mounted for durability anduse a pen-stylus instead of a keyboard. Students will beable to switch between maps and ortho-rectified imagesin order to better locate features, and create layers ofmaps showing different features, all while in the field.These can then be used to visually and statistically testcorrelations between natural features (e.g. streamterraces and vegetation types), and the data can later bedownloaded into standard GIS programs (e.gARCINFO) for further analysis.

POLICYOne element of the field course that may be unique toNAU's Environmental Sciences program is theintegration of policy throughout the curriculum. Theprogram recognizes that environmental conditions ofresources are intimately linked to past management

decisions and, in turn, influence future policy andmanagement plans. Interdisciplinary and team teachingare effective strategies to bridge the environmentalscience/policy gap (Schlosberg and Sisk 2000). Policyincorporation into the field course begins with anintroduction to the pertinent land management laws andpolicies (e.g. Loomis 1993; Vincent 2004). We thenintegrate those laws and policies with federal, state andtribal management strategies (e.g. for ecosystemmanagement see Cortner and Moote 1999; forenvironmental policy in general see Vig and Kraft 2003).By comparing the policies with the managementpractices they inspire and the on-the-ground results ofthe management, students learn the effects of seeminglyvague national policy upon the river's environment.

The lower San Juan River offers many opportunitiesto investigate, compare and contrast land managementstrategies. The northern bank and river right-of-way arecontrolled by the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI)Bureau of Land Management (BLM) while the southernbank is controlled by the Navajo Nation. The USDAForest Service and the DOI National Park Service (NPS)manage the headwaters and upper reaches of manytributaries. The NPS manages Lake Powell at theterminus of the San Juan River. The Bureau ofReclamation controls water levels for the San Juan Riverand is completing the Animas/La Plata project, whichwill reduce in-stream flow upon its completion (USBureau of Reclamation, 2005). Finally, several bird, fishand plant species are endangered or threatened and thusfall under the purview of the DOI Fish and WildlifeService.

One of the more interesting issues is the possibledesignation of the San Juan River as a Scenic and WildRiver (SWR). During the semester, we discussed howSWR designation would influence the management anddecision-making strategies for agencies responsible forthe San Juan watershed. In addition, we projected whomay object to designation. Under the 1973 EndangeredSpecies Act, the San Juan River already receives aminimum volume of water to protect the Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius). SWR designation wouldfurther demand minimum water flow for theendangered species and may require additional waterfor recreation purposes.

Policy Incorporation Strategies - Our forum for policydiscussions is an evening 'campfire' presentation.Presentation groups of 2-3 students are assigned duringthe Spring semester, and each group is responsible forconducting pre-trip research on its chosen topic. Topicsinclude soil quality, native/invasive plant populations,grazing, water quality, recreational impact on resourcesand the preservation of cultural resources. As the statusof environmental conditions is assessed along the river,we press students to speculate either on past, current orfuture policy decisions that may improve or degradeenvironmental conditions.

A second strategy to integrate policy throughout thecourse includes daytime presentations and discussionsled by a professor, building on a location or site thatillustrates policy choices and problems facing decisionsmakers. Students come to appreciate the challengesfaced by land managers and the need for high qualityenvironmental data as they experience the landscape andwitness vandalism and human impact. Placing youngscientists into the resource and then asking 'what shouldwe do now?' fosters a dialogue and integration across thescience-policy gap.


FIELD COURSE ISSUESSeveral factors have the potential to dramatically affectthe outcome of a field course on a remote river. Oneimportant consideration is whether to have an outfitterhandle the logistics of the trip. All of the instructors hadextensive experience running private river trips, and one(MHO) had run a field class on the San Juan River beforebut had found coordination of the river running and thescience portions of the course difficult. Commercialoutfitters have guaranteed launch dates that allow acourse to be planned long enough in advance foruniversity schedules, whereas private trips (the onlyother option for the San Juan River) are awarded by alottery in late February, well after the start of the springsemester. Commercial outfitters have equipment andskills in first aid, river-running and food preparation thatfew professors have. A final consideration is that thecommercial outfitters carry liability insurance. The mostimportant advantage is that professors are free to teach,grade, advise and work with the students while anindependent team handles food and equipment needs.

Working with Arizona Rafting Adventures (AZRA)provided professional leadership on the river andallowed the professors to concentrate on academicconcerns. The disadvantage of this arrangement was thatthe river trip cost each student over $700. Although thiswas a very generous discount from the normalcommercial rate, it represented a significant burden forthe students. We worried that it would limit some of thelower income students but found that some outsidefunding sources were willing to pay for the class. AZRArecently donated its commercial outfitter's permit toNAU. The NAU Outdoors Program now operates tripsfor several academic units, using equipment donatedwith the permit. Trip costs have dropped somewhat, butmust still cover repair and replacement of equipment,salaries for licensed river guides (required by BLMregulations), and transportation.

Backup Plans - Our field excursion relies upon the riverfor transportation from field site to field site. In 2003, thisproved a problem when the river dropped to such lowlevels (~200 cubic feet per second) that the guidesdeclared it too low to float the rafts. Leaving the river wasa great blow to morale, but we then spent four daysstudying tributary streams and the uplands above theSan Juan River. Student morale improved rapidly as theyrealized that the learning and adventure could continue.This exemplifies the need for backup plans. Floods maywash out a field site, campsites may be occupied, medicalemergencies may disrupt time schedules or other naturalevents may interrupt plans. Our most effective strategyto approach a new complication was to involve studentsin it as a learning opportunity, a technique that keepsmorale up and leads students to ask questions andhypothesize in new situations.

Student Experiences - Field days are long - we typicallyhad breakfast at 6 am, and worked until 6-7 pm, then ateand had our evening discussions. Students becameincreasingly fatigued during the trip. The result is thatstudents were less able to generate the enthusiasm tocontinue discussions or collect data as the tripprogressed. We plan a few more "personal breaks" nextyear but realize that being in the field for eight days inclose company is tiring and some fatigue should beexpected.

Field courses also provide a tremendousopportunity for personal growth. We specifically

addressed this in our nightly "thought pieces". In thesejournaling assignments, students wrote about topicsrelated to nightly presentations (see policy sectionabove), but also took time to evaluate what the trip,including the science, policy, and interpersonalactivities, meant to them. For instance, we asked howthey might see themselves as professionals contributingto land and water management decisions on the San JuanRiver or other riparian systems. Students were proud oftheir development of river and expeditionary skills, butonly a few reflected on their developing interpersonalskills. Nonetheless, we observed students improvinginterpersonal skills as they worked and lived in theirgroups. Students read Petzoldt (1984) prior to the trip inorder to understand the importance of properexpeditionary behavior. Role modeling by the guidesand instructors also helped them understand the needfor professional and cordial behavior. By the middle ofthe trip all students were practicing good 'expeditionbehavior' and smoothly rotating who packed equipmentfor side canyon research, or who contributed to grouptasks in the kitchen or around the campsite. These will beimportant skills as students move out into theworkplace.

LEARNING OUTCOMESOverall evaluation for the course was based upon apre-trip exam (20%), written exercises (thought piecesand data analysis; 30%), student presentations on theriver (10%), a final write-up of the small-group exercise(20%), and active participation in the course (20%). Asour desired learning outcome was for students todemonstrate that they could integrate complexenvironmental field data, our evaluation criteria(described below) emphasized this. We looked forwritten and oral presentations that linked wide varietiesof data and presented coherent models of how systemsfunctioned. In many cases, we also requested students toconsider the policy implications of their work. Becausemost of the course credit was earned while on the river,prompt grading was required in order for students to usethe feedback to improve. This meant that one professorspent most of each evening reading, commenting upon,and grading the students' entries in their notebooks fromthat day. All coursework was turned in before the end ofthe river trip.

Pre-trip Exam - The "final exam" for the lecture portionof the course was conducted at the end of the Springsemester, prior to the river trip. Students were asked touse the background information provided by lecturesand readings to develop a research design for a project tobe conducted on the river. Students presented thebackground, problem, hypotheses, methods, andequipment lists for their individual projects. Theseproject designs were discussed and evaluated by theclass as a whole, as well as graded by the instructors. Theclass then voted on the project ideas that they wanted todevelop further and conduct in groups of 3-4 studentswhile on the river. These became the small-groupprojects discussed above. The final exam was gradedbased upon

• how well the student framed the problem - clarity ofthe research question and hypothesis, clear and wellthought out methods that truly test the hypothesis,practicality of the project (60%)

• how well the student applied science to policy issues(10%)


• salience (10%)• creativity within the bounds of finances and time

(10%)• clarity of presentation (10%)

Data Analysis - During the field course, students wereevaluated daily on the basis of notebook entries made insmall, waterproof field notebooks. Students were askedto describe the hypotheses and methods for the groupand class projects. As the trip progressed, they recordeddata as they were collected, then shared their data withgroup and class members. We would gather as a class onsite immediately after data collection to present, discussand interpret the data. From our discussion sites,students could point out important features, and we hadwhite boards and dry erase markers for drawing modelsand lists. As the data became more complete, studentswere asked to provide interim interpretations andsuggestions on how and if the experiment should bemodified. This models standard research practice. Wefound students had a tendency to believe that it is moreimportant to continue with an inadequate researchdesign, for the sake of continuity, than to change it so thatbetter, more conclusive data could be collected duringthe remainder of the trip. Students wrote up theirresearch projects at the end of the trip in a standard labwriteup (introduction, problem, hypothesis, results,interpretation, conclusion). These final reports, alongwith the interim reports, were evaluated based upon 1)completeness of data collection and presentation, 2)interpretations of the data, and 3) evaluation of theproject (e.g. Did it help solve the problem that wasposed? How might it be improved in the future?).Because faculty members worked closely with thestudents in carrying out the projects and discussedresults extensively with the students, these reportstended to be at a fairly high level.

Evening Discussions - Students were asked to prepareand lead two types of evening group discussions. For thefirst type, they worked in pairs or trios prior to the trip toprepare to lead their assigned evening "campfire"discussion topic (see above), with a different pair andtopic each evening. Presenters used white boards tooutline their presentations, show data, draw maps,and/or introduce concepts. Presentations anddiscussions often lasted more than an hour. Thepresentations were evaluated for the thoroughness oftheir pre-trip preparation, explanations of key phrases ordefinitions, and clarity of presentation. The presentationaudience elaborated on the evening discussion topic byasking follow-up questions. This discussion was notevaluated and often relied on the professors to fill ininformation or provoke debate.

Further assessment of student learning gains wasconducted by evaluating thought pieces, stimulated bythe campfire discussions and written before noon thefollowing day, in which the students discussed theirunderstanding of the issues presented by theircolleagues. These 2-5-page essays focused on someimportant topic, put into a clear question or problemstatement by a professor, that was unanswered at the endof the discussion session. For example, following astudent-led discussion of invasive species, the discussionturned to whether there was any hope in eradicatingthem, and that perhaps we should simply adapt to thenew ecosystem rather than take extreme measures todrive them out. The students chose to write on whether itmakes sense to have a policy that requires so muchmoney and has only temporary results. Another topic

concerned how to deal with the over-allotment ofColorado River Basin water, including that of the SanJuan River. Students learned the details of the effects ofdams during the in-class lectures over the course of thesemester, but seeing the actual effects made the issuemore immediate. Discussion lasted well into the night,and students wrote extensively on what measures mightbe effective to rationalize the water distribution. Thoughtpieces were graded as essays with a broad rubric with 10points per piece. Instructors rotated daily throughreading and grading thought pieces. Concepts andinterdisciplinary thinking were rewarded more heavilythan grammar and syntax. For instance a student usingher data to compare the types of vegetation at a popularcampsite and at an infrequent lunch stop, or a rarelyvisited tributary, received a higher grade than acolleague making broad generalities and vaguestatements about the 'riparian vegetation looking prettygood' or 'we have got to get rid of these cattle.'

The second type of group discussion was the interimand final reports on group projects. These were preparedand presented by each research group, with guidancefrom their faculty mentor. These presentations weregraded with a pass/fail rubric because the professorswere heavily involved in organization and subsequentpresentation of the data.

Participation - Our assessment strategy also included aparticipation component. Occasionally, a studentstrayed from the task at hand either physically ormentally. We only became concerned and intervened ifthe behavior was chronic. The participation grade wasdesigned to reward those students who stayed on taskand followed the protocol for data collection.

FUTURE OF THE COURSEData from the field course will become part of along-term database of environmental systems of thesouthern Colorado Plateau. This database is beingcreated and managed by the Ecological Monitoring andAssessment (EMA) Foundation, an organization housedat NAU that seeks to provide environmental informationto private and public land management entities, and willbe maintained by them and available on-line. Landmanagers will have the opportunity to suggest researchthey would like to see accomplished. A challenge andopportunity for us is that many of their questions appearto be watershed or regional in scope and will involvesome work outside the riparian zone.

A complicating factor for the San Juan River studiesis the impending completion of the Animas-La Plataproject, in which water from the Animas River (the majorundammed tributary to the San Juan River) will be takenout for irrigation (US Bureau of Reclamation, 2005). Inlow-water years, this may make the difference between anavigable and a non-navigable river. This is especiallytrue for the lower portion of the river near Clay HillsCrossing, where the river has silted up due to theslowing of the current as it encounters Lake Powell. Weplan to develop some survey points and monitor riverbottom level over the years, providing a long-termrecord of the river's behavior in that stretch and anopportunity for students to connect to previous andfuture work.

The San Juan River field course was designed toprovide Environmental Science majors with an intensivefield-oriented, interdisciplinary, research-basedexploration of "place." In addition to investigating thenatural environment, the students also discussed and


debated current land and riparian problems in terms ofecosystem management. Rivers, especially desert rivers,present excellent opportunities to conduct scientificresearch and to learn about the myriad of issues facingmanagers and stakeholders of this valuable resource.Students participating in the San Juan River field coursedevelop hypotheses, design experiments and establishexperimental protocols, and collect, organize, analyze,and present data on a wide range of topics, buildingupon skills and techniques developed in previouscourses.

We view the field course as a resounding success.The goal of the course was for students to integrate datainto coherent models of natural systems. Inaccomplishing this, we hoped that students woulddesign and conduct an interdisciplinary investigation inthe field that utilized techniques and concepts developed in the Environmental Sciences curriculum, includedmanagement and policy implications, and highlightedthe complex nature of environmental issues insouthwestern riparian systems. During the course of thesemester lectures and the 8-day field experience, thestudents 1) designed and executed severalinterdisciplinary field investigations, 2) demonstratedthrough discussion and written work the connectionbetween their data and the management of the region,and 3) worked in teams, relying on the skill sets ofcolleagues with different emphasis specialties, to design,conduct and analyze a series of investigations.Furthermore, although many issues and ideas werediscussed and the group occasionally reached aconsensus on a solution, most students reflected that, aswe discussed further, we raised more questions, engageda wider range of interest groups, and occasionallybecame more frustrated by the legal and politicallimitations to managing the resources. This reveals amuch higher level of sophistication in their analysis asthe course progressed.

Student evaluations are overwhelmingly positive.Most of the constructive criticism focuses on thedemanding pace of research and travel every day. Theoutfitters are essential in providing a high quality course.Each professor reports that he or she covers as muchmaterial as would be possible in any format and the fieldlocation enriches the learning process by presenting 'realworld' challenges. River trips add a sense of adventureand remoteness to field work while rafts allow us to carryplenty of food, water, comfortable camping amenities,and a full host of analytical instruments. Eight days in asemiarid landscape drives home how delicate theenvironmental conditions are while ancient ruins andmodern impacts illustrate the challenges of humanoccupation and enterprise. Each professor noted the highquality of student reports, evening discussions,quantitative data and a marked improvement in datacollection skills. Because of the benefits to the studentsand the constantly changing environmental problems tobe investigated, we expect to continue the river-basedfield school for the foreseeable future.

ACKNOWLDGEMENTSArizona Rafting Adventures is thanked for providingexceptional river support and knowledge at a discountedprice to our classes. Kirk Anderson, Matthew Bowker,Nancy Johnson, and Thomas Sisk also helped lead thecourse.

REFERENCESAnderson, D.E., Ort, M., Ostergren, D., Sisk, T.,

Anderson, K., and Bowker, M., 2004, San Juan Riverfield course at Northern Arizona University,Abstracts, Geological Society of America AnnualMeeting, Denver, paper n. 62-60.

Anderson, D.E., Ort, M.H., and Ostergren, D.A., 2003, Aninterdisciplinary San Juan River field experience forundergraduates through Northern ArizonaUniversity's Center for Environmental Sciences andEducation, Abstracts, Geological Society of AmericaAnnual Meeting, Seattle, paper n. 46-28.

Aton, J.M., and McPherson, R.S., 2000, River Flowingfrom the Sunrise: An Environmental History of theLower San Juan, Logan, Utah State University Press,216 p.

Cortner, H.J., and Moote, M.A., 1999, The Politics ofEcosystem Management, Washington DC, IslandPress, 179 p.

Davis, B.G., 2001, Tools for Teaching, San Francisco,Jossey-Bass, 429 p.

Flower, M.J., 2000, Unsettling Science Literacy, LiberalEducation, v. 86, p. 36.

Gruenewald, D.A., 2003, Foundations of Place: AMultidisciplinary Framework for Place-ConsciousEducation, American Educational Research Journal,v. 40, p. 619-654.

Jordan, T., 2002, Energy and the Environment, ScienceEducation for New Civic Engagement andResponsibilities, Association of American Collegesand Universities, SENCER Summer Institute,August 2002, Santa Clara University, 39 p.

Kearsley, L., 2002, San Juan River Guide: Sand Island toClay Hills Crossing, Flagstaff, Shiva Press, 75 p.

Loomis, J.B., 1993, Integrated Public Lands Management:principle and applications to national forests, parks,wildlife refuges and BLM lands, New York,Columbia University Press, 474 p.

Petzoldt, P., 1984, The New Wilderness Handbook, NewYork, W. W. Norton and Company, 317 p.

Schlosberg, D. and Sisk, T.D., 2000, The environmentalscience/policy interface: crossing disciplinaryboundaries with a team teaching approach, PoliticalScience and Politics, v. 33, p. 75-79.

SENCER, 2005, Science Engagement for New CivicResponsibilities and Engagement, http://www.sencer.net (31 January, 2005).

Schacter, A., 2002, Chemistry and the Environment,Science Education for New Civic Engagement andResponsibilities, Association of American Collegesand Universities. SENCER Summer Institute,August 2002, Santa Clara University, 39 p.

Siebert, E.D. and McIntosh, W.J., 2001, College Pathwaysto the Science Education Standards, National ScienceTeacher Association Press, Arlington, VA, 192 p.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 2005, Animas-La PlataProject, Implementation of the Colorado UteSettlement Act Amendments of 2000, http://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/animas/overview.html

Vig, N.J. and Kraft, M.E., 2003, Environmental Policy:new directions for the 21st century, Washington DC,CQ Press, 436 p.

Vincent, C.H., 2004, Federal Land ManagementAgencies: Background on Land and ResourcesManagement, Congressional Research ServiceReport to Congress, Washington DC, Library ofCongress, 77 p.


Membership Application or Renewal FormName: __________________________ Phone:

__________________________

Mailing Address: __________________________________

________________________________________________

Fax: ____________________

Email: ___________________

City: ______________________________ State: ________ Zip: _____________________

___College/University Professor @ ______________

___Precollege Teacher @ ________________________Other @ ________________________________

Checks, MasterCard, or VISA (US funds

only) are payable to:National Association ofGeoscience Teachers. Mail to: NAGT, POBox 5443, Bellingham, WA 98227-5443

Membership Rates (US funds)

Regular USA $35 _____Outside USA $47 _____

Student–USA $20 _____Student–outside USA $32 _____Retired NAGT member $30 _____

Library SubscriptionsRegular USA $55 _____

Outside USA $67 ____________New _______Renewal

q Checkq Credit card: MC/VISA (circle one) Number: ________________________Signature: __________________________ Exp. Date __________________________

The Journal and membership year runs from January to December. Subscriptions received afterJune 1 will begin receiving the Journal in January of the following year. Back issues are

available for $15 (foreign $18) each.

*To qualify for student rate, indicate and obtain verification from a NAGT member:

___Undergraduate ___Graduate ____________________________________Signature of NAGT member School

integrating policy and land management issues into a ... · between policy and the natural system...

Documents