Funding Agency: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Date of Award: July 20, 2000

Assistance ID No: 82837801

Project Period: July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2001

Project Progress Report Period: July 1, 2000 to February 28, 2001 (8 months)

Timeline Schedule Activity

• Implement project— Jul. 2000 Jul. 20, 2000

• Develop address list of 10th, 11th and 12th grade teachers— Jul. 2000 Aug. 2000

• Invite science teachers to attend environmental workshop— Jul. 2000 Sep. 2000

Timeline Schedule Activity

Project Activities (Continued) by Month & Year Comp. Date

• Hold training workshop in the development of proposals

1. Purpose and Goals of the Workshop—Ray Beckett, Ph.D., Program Manager, Utah Engineering Experiment Station, College of Mines and Earth Sciences, University of Utah
2. Intended Learning Outcome—Larry Madden, Salt Lake School District, representing Brett Moulding, Utah State Office of Education
3. An Overview of EPA Region VIII Environmental Education and Research Initiatives and Issues of Concern—Tim Brown, Utah Society for Environmental Education, and EPA Region VIII Representative in Utah for Environmental Education
4. An Overview of the Department of Environmental Quality and Issues of Concern, Including Air Quality and Radon Gas—Richard Sprott, Acting Director, Division of Air Quality, Utah Department of Environmental Quality
5. Recycling and Related Environmental Issues of Concern—Amber Suntin-DeBirk, Executive Director, Utah Recycling Coalition, and David S. Wheeler, Environmental Scientist, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
6. Effects of Environmental Contamination on Migratory Birds and Endangered Species—Nathan Darnall, Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
7. Energy Efficiency, Environmental Needs and Issues of Concern—Ellen Stone, Program Administrator, National Energy Foundation, Office of Energy Services
8. Wetlands, Environmental Restoration and Issues of Concern—Steve Jensen, Program Manager, Water Resources Planning and Restoration, Slat Lake County Public Works, Department of Engineering
9. Hazardous Wastes and Environmental Issues of Concern—Ted Diamant, Solid Hazardous Waste Specialist, Salt Lake County Health Services Department
10. Water Quality and Conservation—Ann Evans, Education Coordinator, Utah Division of Water Resources
11. Surface Water and Environmental Contamination: Rivers, Streams and Lakes—Jeff Salt, Director, Jordan River Environmental Education Program
12. Environmental Health Issues of Concern in Utah—Karen H. Keller, Epidemiologist, Bureau of Epidemiology, Utah Department of Health
13. Key Elements of An Effective Research Proposal—Cindy M. Kiel, J.D., Grants and Contracts Officer, Office of Sponsored Projects, University of Utah
14. Request for Proposal (RFP), and Submittal and Evaluation Process—Ray Beckett, Ph.D., Program Manager, Utah Engineering Experiment Station, College of Mines and Earth Sciences, University of Utah
15. Pre- and Post-Project Evaluation Process—Ray Briscoe, Ph.D., President, Insight Research, and the External Evaluator of the EPA funded Environmental Research and Training Project for Science Teachers and Students
16. Workshop Summary and Evaluation—Ray Beckett, Ph.D., Program Manager, Utah Engineering Experiment Station, College of Mines and Earth Sciences, University of Utah

Timeline Schedule Activity

Project Activities (Continued) by Month & Year Comp. Date

1. Workshop Agenda and Purpose.
2. A List of the Science Teachers Who Registered to Attend the Workshop (including name of school represented, mailing address, telephone and fax number, and e-mail address)
3. Resource Documents:
1. Intended Learning Outcomes for the Workshop.
2. Intended Learning Outcomes for 9^th to 12^th Grade Science Classes (Developed by the Utah State Office of Education). (See Exhibit "C" in the Appendix of this progress report.)
3. Environmental Issues of Concern as Identified by Region VIII, and the EPA Headquarters in Washington, D.C. (See Exhibit "D" in the Appendix of this progress report.)
4. Environmental Issues of Concern Prioritized by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
5. Request for Proposal (RFP) (A guide for science teacher guide to use in working with their students in the development of environmental research project proposals addressing environmental issues in Utah).
6. Environmental Research Project Proposal 2000-2001 (A form to be used by students in the development of environmental project proposals).
7. Timeline Schedule.
8. Science Teacher Record of In-Kind Support (A form for recording in-kind support provided by outside organizations in support of science class research project proposals).
9. Guideline for Effective Proposal Writing.
10. Utah’s Environment: The Twenty-First Century (An environmental booklet published by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality).
11. Earth & Us: Green Pages (An environmental booklet published by the University of Utah Television Station KUED—serving as a resource guide concerning various groups and organizations involved in protecting the environment).
12. Utah State Office of Education Science In-service Evaluation From (This form is used by Utah science teachers to evaluate in-service training programs and workshops).

• Science teachers and students identify community

Timeline Schedule Activity

Project Activities (Continued) by Month & Year Comp. Date

• Science teachers work with their students in developing

Randy Stacey, Science Teacher

Mountain Crest High School

Project No. ER-01: "Revolutionizing High School Energy"

Project No. ER-02: "Operation Wetlands"

Project No. ER-03: "Wetland Habitat or Degradation Around Great Salt Lake"

Project No. ER-04: "The Effects of Snowmobile Recreation on Forest habitats"

Project No. ER-05"What is the Quality of the Greatest Snow On Earth?"

Project No. ER-06: "Assessing Water Use, Conservation and Wetland Habitat in Draper City, Utah"

Project No. ER-07: "Will Recycling Help?"

Project No. ER-08: "East Canyon Recycling Program"

Project No. ER-09: "What Can Be done to Restore an Area After a Fire?"

Project No. ER-10: "Draper Wetland Park Study"

Project No. ER-11: "Environmental Impact of a New Ski Tram"

Project No. ER-12: "The Impact of Using Styrofoam Dishes and Plastic Utensils in a School Lunch"

Project No. ER-13: "Environmental Friendly Legacy Parkway"

Project No. ER-14: "Pollution Point Sources on the Jordan River"

Project No. ER-15: "How to Stop Smoke Pollution from Forest Fires"

Project No. ER-16: "Water Pollution in Davis County"

Project No. ER-17:"An Evaluation of the Water Quality of West High School"

Project No. ER-19: "Reducing Commuter Miles Driven by Logan High School Students and Faculty"

Project No. ER-20: Air Quality Awareness"

Project No. ER-21: Got Pride? Recycling is True, It's Up to You!"

Project No. ER-22: "Layton Wetland Study: The Wonder of Wetlands"

Timeline Schedule Activity

Project Activities (Continued) by Month & Year Comp. Date

Project No. ER-24: "Radon Detection in Metropolitan Tooele County"

Project No. ER-25: "Bear River Watershed Monitor and Mitigation"

Project No. ER-26: "Alternative Energy Demonstration Project"

Dennis McMurdie, Science Teacher

Union Middle School

Project No. ER-27: "Kennecott Copper Wetlands Contamination"

Project No. ER-28: "Water Quality Assessment of Big Cotton Canyon"

1. Quality of the Proposed Environmental Project Proposal (20 points).
2. Collaborative Research (15 points).
3. Project Description (50 points).
4. Quality of Project Leadership (10 points).
5. Reasonableness of the Proposed Project Budget (5 points).
6. Total Evaluation Points Possible (100 points).

Timeline Schedule Activity

Project Activities (Continued) by Month & Year Comp. Date

• Science class project proposals selected for implementation— Nov. 2000 Feb. 23, 2001

1. Science fair projects; ecology unit.
2. Class research projects.
3. Student based projects.
4. Flyer.
5. Use the EPA environmental research project plan.
6. Teach students how to research issues that pertain to our environment.
7. Apply for a proposal grant.
8. Incorporate information into my lesson plan. The subjects can be put into many different lessons and applied into the different areas of my subject.
9. Tie it into the science fair projects that the students are introduced to.
10. Plan projects to be completed as a part of my curriculum this year.
11. Apply for grant—fund student learning.
12. I plan to contact some of the presenters as resources and begin to put together a proposal.
13. Take information given to class and have the students propose experimental research applicable to class.
14. I plan on using the ideas given to start a project or project with my students.

Timeline Schedule Activity

1. New ideas.
2. Good ideas for research projects.
3. Lots of great ideas.
4. Real life problems identification and solving.
5. Provides applied scientific research for students.
6. Relevant problems for students.
7. Education of the environment.
8. Will allow me to apply grant writing information to future projects.
9. This workshop helped to provide a lot of links to agencies involved with environmental issues.
10. Wonderful concrete resources.
11. Gives me a basis for research class appropriate resources.
12. It will be an ongoing process to get my students involved in environmental projects.
13. Good Information.
14. This project could become an ongoing study or project.
15. Additional information.
16. Contacts, resources and grant writing.
17. This will help with ideas for the future as well as this year.
18. Valuable resources for my classes. Many ideas for projects and science fairs. Personal improvement added to knowledge base.
19. Students will have long lasting awareness of environmental issues in their community.
20. Gave several ideas for continued projects for student’s hands-on science.
21. Real world—not just out of the book only—first hand exposure to actual problems in the environment.
22. The different information provided is a lot, it can be incorporated into many different lesson plans with different subjects. Plus information given is factual and I have been provided with many resources to improve my teaching instruction.
23. It provided me with information and contacts to government agencies.

• Science class project proposals implemented by students— Nov.-Dec. 2000

Timeline Schedule Activity

• Final report of the proposed project developed and submitted

The anticipated activities planned for the remaining months of the EPA project are based on the activities listed above, in which a completion date has not as yet been posted. A summary of these activities is presented below in a narrative or objective oriented format.

• Science students working in research task oriented teams will implement and administer their respective environmental research projects. In this regard, it should be noted that two middle school 9^th grade science classes also submitted environmental proposals as a part of the EPA project. This represents a slight deviation from the target population for this project, but does not in anyway detract from the overall goals of the project as a whole. The reason for the middle schools’ involvement in the project is the result of the Utah State Office of Education also sending an invitation to all middle school science teachers in Utah to participate in the November 11, 2000 workshop, as well as to consider having the students in their respective science classes participate in the project by developing and submitting an environmental research project proposal for evaluation and funding.

• Each group of students that submitted a proposal will develop and final project report at the conclusion of their respective research projects. These final project reports are to be submitted to the University of Utah on or before June 30, 2001.

• An executive summary of each environmental project will be incorporated into the Home Page of the EPA project.

• Project reports developed by the science students in each science class will be published and distributed to Utah's high school science teachers for discussion and review with their science students.

• Science teachers will complete feedback evaluation forms concerning their assessments of the EPA project and the environmental research project(s) implemented by their students. The external evaluator will conduct a post-test of the students involved in the design and implementation of science class/field oriented environmental research projects to assess the degree to which the intended learning outcomes of the EPA project were achieved as a whole. This same post-test instrument will also be administered to the control student groups that took this same test during the pre-test assessment activities of the project as noted above. The project staff will also interview or survey the project proposal reviewers, science teachers and volunteers from industry who participated in any one or more of the EPA project’s assessment, implementation and/or operational phases. The purpose of such assessment activities will be to determine the areas where the project’s activities as a whole could be improved.

• In-kind support provided by the business and public sector in support of the project as a whole, and also in support of the environmental research projects developed and implemented by the participating sciences classes will be tabulated at the conclusion of the project. The in-kind support will be included as a key component of the final project report.

• The project director will develop a final report concerning the accomplishments of the EPA funded project. This report will include a discussion of the evaluation data and findings of the external evaluator. The final

This final project report will be submitted to the EPA within 90 days of the conclusion of the EPA Grant.

The project’s total budget and cumulative expenditures to date (July 1, 2000 to February 28, 2001) are depicted below.

Budget Category Budget Cumulative Expenditures Funds Remaining

Direct labor:

1. Personnel $ 60,726 $27,638 $ 33,088

2. Fringe Benefits 20,040 6,280 13,760

Subtotal $ 80,766 $33,918 $ 46,848

Other Direct Costs:

3. Travel $ 1,674 $ 863 $ 811

4. Equipment 2,577 - 2,577

5. Supplies 4,312 3,518 794

6. Contractual 28,000 - 28,000

7. Construction - - -

8. Other 30,000 - 30,000

Subtotal ODC $ 66,563 $ 4,381 $ 62,182

Total Direct Costs $147,329 $38,299 $109,030

9. Indirect Costs 34,1% 34,072 $13,060 $ 21,012

Total Direct &

Indirect Costs $181,401 $50,359 $131,042

Direct Labor—Direct labor expenses are in keeping with the funds allocated for the project on a month-to-month basis.

Travel—The balance of travel funds will be used to conduct on-site interviews/visits as may be required in carrying out the evaluation and project assessment tasks specified in the project proposal.

Equipment—Due to a vendor delay in billing, the costs incurred for computer equipment for the project will be posted to the project’s equipment account for the month of March 2001.

Supplies—The remaining funds depicted for this budget element will be used for the printing and distribution of the Post-Test questionnaire that will be administered to the science students that participated in developing and implementing an environmental research project, and also to the groups of students that did not participate in the project.

Contractual and Other—In consideration of the project budget and cumulative expenditures noted above for these budget items, the $28,000 shown for the "Contractual" budget element will be expensed during the months of March through June 2001. These funds are for the support of 26 environmental research projects implemented by science class students working in research teams in 21 schools throughout Utah. The funds will enable each science class to purchase needed materials, supplies and equipment for their respective environmental research project(s).

In consideration of the$30,000 depicted for the budget category of "Other," these funds will be used to provide each science teacher with a consulting fee for their participation in the environmental and training workshop held on November 11, 2000, and for their involvement in guiding their students in the process of implementing and administering the field oriented research activities associated with the respective research projects developed by their students. The consulting funds will be distributed to each teacher as soon as a final environmental project report has been submitted on behalf of the students in their science class.

Indirect Costs—The rate of expenditure for this budget category is in keeping with the standard accounting procedures of the University of Utah.

Concluding Budgetary Comments—Concerning the rate of expenditures as compared to the project’s timeline schedule, only 28% percent of the budget funds have been expensed as of February 28, 2000. This percentage when compared to the months that the project has been in operation, which is equal to a 67% time expenditure or eight (8) months divided by 12 months, represents a 39 point spread or deviation from that which is depicted for the rate of budget expenditures. However, this derivation in dollars expended to date as compared to the number on months that the project has been in operation, is not considered to be a problem. It is primarily due in to a slippage in the project’s schedule for submitting, evaluating and implementing science class developed environmental research projects in various communities throughout Utah; a situation that will not affect the deliverables specified in the project proposal initially submitted to the EPA.

When the EPA project proposal was initially developed, a variation in timeline schedules for science courses from one school district to another, and the impact of students changing from one science class to another during traditional semester grade changes was not considered at the time that the project’s timeline schedule was being constructed. In essence, this factor serves as one of the primary reasons for this derivation in the rate of expenditures.

Further, funds allocated to pay for the services of an external evaluator will not be drawn upon until the end of the project.

Thus, the largest portions of the budget funds allocated for the funding of science class developed environmental research projects, and the payment of teacher consulting fees or stipends will take place during the remaining months of the project, March through June 2001.