In urban environments, many people can become disconnected from the natural resources on which they depend. That's especially true when it comes to water, which spills effortlessly from faucets in homes and businesses every day, whether the actual water supply is abundant or scarce. This paper's authors aimed to bring more awareness of the watershed to Dallas-area residents between 2006 and 2010.
The authors began with a telephone survey of 1,000 adults who live in the Upper Trinity River Watershed, which comprises 14 counties—including Dallas County with a population of over 2.3 million—in North Central Texas. The survey collected demographic information and gauged residents' knowledge of the watershed.
In general, the results indicated that citizens were not very knowledgeable about their water supply. Less than 8% of respondents were aware that they live in a watershed. Respondents with lower incomes were less likely to know about the watershed than those with higher incomes. Forty-five percent did not know where their water comes from, with Hispanics and African Americans being much less likely than others to know this fact. Lower levels of education and income were also associated with less knowledge of the area's water source. A similar pattern emerged with respect to knowledge about where water goes when it leaves the home. On the other hand, a majority of survey respondents (77.7%) were concerned about the adequacy of their water supply.
To help address the general lack of knowledge about the watershed, the authors designed educational materials for residents. They decided to target 5- to 10-year-old children because of research suggesting that information and behaviors learned at early ages can lead to long-term pro-environmental behaviors. The authors worked with elementary and middle school teachers to develop classroom activities aligned with national and state science standards and that focus on the area's urban watershed issues, and they hired certified elementary and middle school teachers (who were in college working toward graduate degrees in environmental science) to teach the 45 to 50 minute lessons.
All of the activities included a water conservation theme. The kindergarten activity (“Drip! Drop! Water Does Not Stop!”) used models to show that there is a limited amount of available water, and included a discussion of how to help conserve water. Students were sent home with a cup and a note to parents explaining that the kids could show how they save water by brushing their teeth with only the water in the cup. In first grade, the activity “Here I Go 'Round My Watershed” used mathematics skills to teach students about the water cycle and the limited amount of available fresh water. The students took home a water cycle bracelet that provided visual and tactile reminders of the water cycle. In second grade, with “Now You See It—Now You Don't,” students focused on what happens to water when it leaves the home. They simulated the water treatment process, experimented with different filtration materials, and took home a “Water-Saving Guide” worksheet. Third graders experienced “Name That Surface Water,” in which they created model watersheds and took home a “Personal Water Use Survey.” The students were asked to document their water use, take a water-saving action, and then complete the survey again and graph the results of their conservation efforts. In fourth grade, with the “H2O Is Underground, Too!” activity, students created models of an aquifer to learn about underground water storage, and what happens if the resource is overused. Finally, in the fifth grade “What-a-Shed” activity, students were divided into two families. One family simulated the water use of a typical American family while the other demonstrated water-saving behaviors. The aim of the activity was to demonstrate that the typical behaviors result in double the water use of a more conservation-minded family.
All of the students also had the opportunity to commit to specific water-conservation behaviors at the conclusion of their activities, based on research that specific commitments are more likely to lead to actual behavior changes.
Results of teacher evaluations indicate that the program was well received. Teachers were asked to evaluate both the lesson and the presenter. The average overall program score was 9.6, based on a scale of 1 to 10. Evaluations did not examine changes in the students' knowledge or behavior (though the authors note that 94% of the students committed to turn off the water when brushing their teeth). Although the authors acknowledge the need for more evaluation, they think this is a program that can be replicated in a variety of communities.
The Bottom Line
This Dallas-area water-education program is designed for elementary school students, with separate activities for each grade level. The activities are hands-on, age-appropriate, and action-oriented. The activities conclude with asking the students to make a specific behavioral commitment, which research suggests is an effective strategy for spurring action. Although teachers rate the program well, the effectiveness of the activities in changing knowledge and behavior has not been tested. And, interestingly, though the research that informed the development of the program identifies racial and socioeconomic disparities in watershed knowledge, this curriculum does not address that issue.