Not All Are Created Equal: An Analysis of the Environmental Programs/Departments in U.S. Institutions of Higher Education From 1900 Until March 2014

Aldemaro Romero; Michael Nate

doi:10.31686/ijier.vol4.iss5.542

Authors

Aldemaro Romero City University of New York, USA http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0409-5241
Michael Nate City University of New York, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol4.iss5.542

Abstract

Environmental academic programs in U.S. institutions of higher education have traditionally lacked definition of their nature and unifying principles. In order to ascertain how these programs are presently constituted in U.S. institutions of higher education, we surveyed 1050 environmental programs/departments between November 2013 and March of 2014. The states with the highest number of those programs/departments were New York (100), Pennsylvania (92), California (76), Ohio (56), Massachusetts (54), while those with the lowest numbers are Oklahoma, and Utah (4), Delaware (3), Arkansas, Hawaii, South Dakota, and Wyoming (2), North Dakota (1), and Idaho (0). However, when the state population is taken into account and the number of programs per 1,000,000 inhabitants is calculated, the results vary greatly for the ones that were at the top in absolute numbers but remain basically the same for those that were at the bottom in absolute number. Thus, the states with the highest number of programs/departments per 1,000,000 inhabitants are Vermont (30.364), Montana (15.160), Maine (15.056), the District of Columbia (14.957), Alaska (14.080), and Rhode Island (10.451), and at the bottom we find Idaho (0), Arkansas (0.686), Oklahoma (1.066), Texas (1.352), Florida (1.436), Utah (1.447), Hawaii (1.470), and North Dakota (1.487).

The names Environmental Science and Environmental Studies are, by far, the most common ones being applied to these programs, accounting for 52.40% of the programs in our study. Environmental programs are also housed in departments of Biology/Ecology/Conservation (9.93%), Policy/Analysis/Planning (7.19%), and Geology (4.79%).

Between 1900 (the year of the first program was created) and 1958, only 14 programs were established. For the period 1959-1999, there is a dramatic increase in the number of programs. There are two big "waves" in the creation of programs: one between 1965 and 1976 (with a high peak in 1970) and another starting 1988 and, probably, continuing to this date, with a peak in 1997. Representatives of the programs surveyed cited students and faculty demand and job market opportunities as the most common reasons behind the creation of these programs.

The high diversity of names and emphases found in this study is consistent with the premise that Environmental Studies is a field where there is a lack of unifying principles and clarity of what environmental studies programs should be.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Aldemaro Romero, City University of New York, USA

Weissman School of Arts & Sciences, Baruch College
Michael Nate, City University of New York, USA

Weissman School of Arts & Sciences, Baruch College

References

Bennett, B. Y. 1996. Metaphor and Curriculum Theorizing in Environmental Studies. Temple University Graduate Board, Ph.D. Dissertation, 81 pp.

Brillault, M.R. 2000. Assessment of Law Schools with Environment and Natural Resource Programs. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28(1):276-281.

Brough, H. 1992. Environmental Studies: Is it Academic? World Watch Jan.-Feb.: 26-33.

Caldwell, L. K. 1983. Environmental Studies: Discipline or Metadiscipline? The Environmental Professional 5: 247-259.

Filho, W.L. (ed.). 2002. Teaching sustainability at universities. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Horning, J. F. 1996. Training the Next Generation. Environment. June: 28-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.1996.9929263

Hunn, J. L. 1996. Toward a Reconstructive Education: An Environmental Studies Curriculum for the University Level. San Diego State University, Master Thesis, 185 pp.

Jacobson, S. K. & M. D. McDuff. 1998. Training Idiot Savants: The Lack of Human Dimensions in Conservation Biology. Conservation Biology 12(2): 263-267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.97235.x

Kettl, D. F. 1999. In Pollution research, Universities Can Bridge the Critical Gap Between Science and Policy. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 26 February 1999, p. B8.

Kim, H. S. & J. P. Dixon. 1993. Subject Indicators to Present the Nature and Limit of Environmental Studies in US Graduate Schools. The Environmentalist 13(2): 137-144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01905671

Maniates, M.F. & J.C. Whissel. 2000. Environmental studies: The sky is not falling. BioScience 50(6):509-517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2000)050[0509:ESTSIN]2.0.CO;2

Mattes, K. B. 1994. How to Study the Environment? Harvard Magazine March/April 1994: 28-32.

McLaughlin, Jr., C. H. 1994. Development Environmental Literacy Through Technology Education. The Technology Teacher 54(3): 30-34.

Newell, W. H. & W. J. Green. 1982. Defining and Teaching Interdisciplinary Studies. Improving College and University Teaching 30(1): 23-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00193089.1982.10533747

Orr, D. W. 1990. Environmental Education and Ecological Literacy. The Education Digest 55(9): 49-53.

Rodenhouse, M.P. (Ed). 2005. 2005 Higher Education Directory. Falls Church, Virginia: Higher Education Publications, Inc., 987 pp.

Romero, A., M. Brandt, P. Vanselow, & J. Creswell. 2000. Not all are created equal: An analysis of the environmentally-related programs/departments in U.S. academic institutions until December 1999. Macalester Environmental Review (www.macalester.edu/environmentalstudies/MacEnvReview/equalarticle.htm).

Romero A. & H. Eastwood. 2002. Not all are created equal: An analysis of the environmental programs/departments in U.S academic institutions until March 2002. Macalester Environmental Review (http://www.macalester.edu/environmentalstudies/MacEnvReview/equalarticle2002.htm)

Romero, A. & C. Jones. 2003. Not all are created equal: An analysis of the environmental programs/departments in U.S academic institutions until March 2003. Macalester Environmental Review

(http://www.macalester.edu/environmentalstudies/MacEnvReview/equalarticle2003.htm)

Romero, A. & P. Silveri. 2006. Not all are created equal: an analysis of the environmental programs/departments in U.S. academic institutions from 1900 until May 2005. Journal of Integrative Biosciences 1(1):1-15. 1 February 2006.

Romero A., A. Stern, & K. Benz. 2001. Not all are created equal: An analysis of the environmental programs/departments in U.S academic institutions until March 2001. Macalester Environmental Review (http://www.macalester.edu/environmentalstudies/MacEnvReview/equalarticle2001.htm)

Schneider, S. H. 1997. Defining and Teaching environmental literacy. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12(11): 457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(97)01207-X

Soulé, M. E. & D. E. Press. 1998. What is Environmental Studies? BioScience 48(5): 397-405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1313379

Wilke, R. 1995. Environmental Literacy and the College Curriculum. Colleges and Universities Have a Challenge to Meet. EPA Journal: Spring 1995: 28-30.